"Slinging the bat"

[MikeStrybel]

I already cited the relevant rules for OBR. In Fed, 3-3-1c or m discusses bat throwing and pertinent penalties. I like what Florida says about Unsportsmanlike Conduct.
From the FHSAA: "7.2 UNSPORTSMANLIKE CONDUCT
7.2.1 “Unsportsmanlike Conduct” Defined. A student who commits an act of malicious and hateful nature toward a contest official, an opponent or any other person attending an athletic contest shall be guilty of unsportsmanlike conduct. Such acts may include, but are not limited to, profanity, striking or threatening a contest official; physical contact with an opponent which is beyond the normal scope of competition; spitting on a contest official or opponent; directing gender, racial or ethnic slurs toward a contest official, an opponent or any other person attending an athletic contest; or other such acts deemed to be unacceptable conduct according to the principal of the member school the student attends or this Association."

I don't know if other states have taken this step but it would be interesting to read how they define it.

The NCAA has several misconduct rules as well. Besides acts against game personnel, they penalize acts that bring disrepute on the game.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

From the FHSAA: "7.2 UNSPORTSMANLIKE CONDUCT
7.2.1 “Unsportsmanlike Conduct” Defined. A student who commits an act of malicious and hateful nature toward a contest official, an opponent or any other person attending an athletic contest shall be guilty of unsportsmanlike conduct."

So riddle me this, how does an accidental act get punished by a rule that is directed at "malicious and hateful" actions?

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

So riddle me this, how does an accidental act get punished by a rule that is directed at "malicious and hateful" actions?

It appears that the FHSAA did. The rule I noted is a step towards defining unsportsmanlike conduct for their baseball administrators and officials.

For the rest of us without such guidelines from their state association, you will find accidental bat throwing under the section dealing with Bench and Field Conduct. 3-3-1c states that after a warning any player on the team warned will be ejected for similar conduct. Under 3-3-1m any deliberate bat throwing will result in an immediate ejection. I wrote about these things earlier.

[UmpJM]

Mike,

The thing that "cracks me up" about the FHSAA definition is that, while what they describe I would certainly consider "unsportsmanlike", MY threshold for "unsportsmanlike" is WAY below "hateful and malicious".

Heck, I've dumped a kid for "drawing a line" on me, though I considered it neither hateful nor malicious - just inappropriately disrespectful.

Plus, how the hell do I know what one or another HS principal deems an "unacceptable act"? Does it vary from a fundamentalist Christian school, to a parochial school, to a public school?

Profanity (G*d d@mn!) gets the hook, but obscenity (F#ck y*u!) and vulgarity (You're bull$hit!) don't?!?!?

I know, I'm just having a little fun with what they wrote. While I believe it "well intentioned", I am singularly unimpressed.

It's really what the UMPIRE judges an unacceptable act, informed by the criteria defined in the FED book.

JM

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by umpjm (nee coachjm)

mike,

the thing that "cracks me up" about the fhsaa definition is that, while what they describe i would certainly consider "unsportsmanlike", my threshold for "unsportsmanlike" is way below "hateful and malicious".

Heck, i've dumped a kid for "drawing a line" on me, though i considered it neither hateful nor malicious - just inappropriately disrespectful.

Plus, how the hell do i know what one or another hs principal deems an "unacceptable act"? Does it vary from a fundamentalist christian school, to a parochial school, to a public school?

Profanity (g*d d@mn!) gets the hook, but obscenity (f#ck y*u!) and vulgarity (you're bull$hit!) don't?!?!?

I know, i'm just having a little fun with what they wrote. While i believe it "well intentioned", i am singularly unimpressed.

It's really what the umpire judges an unacceptable act, informed by the criteria defined in the fed book.

Jm

+1

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

Mike,

The thing that "cracks me up" about the FHSAA definition is that, while what they describe I would certainly consider "unsportsmanlike", MY threshold for "unsportsmanlike" is WAY below "hateful and malicious".

Heck, I've dumped a kid for "drawing a line" on me, though I considered it neither hateful nor malicious - just inappropriately disrespectful.

Plus, how the hell do I know what one or another HS principal deems an "unacceptable act"? Does it vary from a fundamentalist Christian school, to a parochial school, to a public school?

Profanity (G*d d@mn!) gets the hook, but obscenity (F#ck y*u!) and vulgarity (You're bull$hit!) don't?!?!?

I know, I'm just having a little fun with what they wrote. While I believe it "well intentioned", I am singularly unimpressed.

It's really what the UMPIRE judges an unacceptable act, informed by the criteria defined in the FED book.

JM

I agree with most of what you wrote. I still think it is a valuable tool for new umpires though. Some here seem to have forgotten what it is like for rookies to confront a new play or behavior. For those new umpires, such definitions are as useful as the ubiquitous, 'make final decision on points not covered by the rules.'

The NCAA has similar guidelines but games governed by OBR are a puddle for many rookies because they lack such definitions. Experience usually gets you through the mire but the guidelines cited are helpful not perfect. According to Jim Evans and J/R, few things about our rule book are.

The supplements issued each year by the Fed and NCAA are often ignored by those who profess to 'know enough to get the job done' but forget that the purpose is provide clarity. The FHSAA tried. Maybe they didn't achieve what some of us would like but it must be good enough since they kept it verbatim for the next year.

As an aside, the Sox-Yankees game saw Ozzie look like a clown again. Tichenor rung up Konerko on a knee high strike. He nailed the call. Ozzie came out to chew on him and wound up looking ridiculous for arguing balls and strikes. If Tichenor had been back in Trips that 'conversation' would not have happened like it did. A lot of rookies watch things like that and believe they should emaluate them.

[UmpJM]

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

It appears that the FHSAA did. The rule I noted is a step towards defining unsportsmanlike conduct for their baseball administrators and officials.

....

Mike,

To be fair, I must say there is one "diamond in the rough" from the FHSAA "definition" - to me, anyway.

It is:

...physical contact with an opponent which is beyond the normal scope of competition;...

That may be the best "definition" of malicious contact that I've ever read.

It's not going to be very "helpful" to a "new guy", because it offers no criteria by which to judge what IS "...beyond the normal scope of competition...".

But, that 's pretty much what I think the FED/NCAA MC rule IS.

JM

[Simply The Best]

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

I already cited the relevant rules for OBR. In Fed, 3-3-1c or m discusses bat throwing and pertinent penalties. I like what Florida says about Unsportsmanlike Conduct.
From the FHSAA: "7.2 UNSPORTSMANLIKE CONDUCT
7.2.1 “Unsportsmanlike Conduct” Defined. A student who commits an act of malicious and hateful nature toward a contest official, an opponent or any other person attending an athletic contest shall be guilty of unsportsmanlike conduct. Such acts may include, but are not limited to, profanity, striking or threatening a contest official; physical contact with an opponent which is beyond the normal scope of competition; spitting on a contest official or opponent; directing gender, racial or ethnic slurs toward a contest official, an opponent or any other person attending an athletic contest; or other such acts deemed to be unacceptable conduct according to the principal of the member school the student attends or this Association."

I don't know if other states have taken this step but it would be interesting to read how they define it.

Originally, this definition did not have "but are not limited to" in it. I was out of country at the time but am told that phrase was a must to allow the complete discretion of sporting officials to rule on UC.