Fake Tag = Ejection

[w_sohl]

Originally Posted by mbyron

I understand state associations backing up their officials, but that's ridiculous. The correct answer is: "We'll review the ejection report and take appropriate action."

And then take appropriate action. How sad.

And then they have to review EVERY ejection. They aren't going to set the precedent of having to take the extra step to evaluate whether an ejection should be reviewed or not. Sucks for the kid, but I see their point.

[Rich Ives]

So is there an official rule on the steps to take?

If it says warn then eject and warn was skipped then protest the rule misapplication.

[w_sohl]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

So is there an official rule on the steps to take?

If it says warn then eject and warn was skipped then protest the rule misapplication.

Too late for a protest. I think it needs to be protested before the next play, but definately by EOG.

[blueump]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

So is there an official rule on the steps to take?

If it says warn then eject and warn was skipped then protest the rule misapplication.

Interesting enough, my state does not allow or recognize protests either.

[Publius]

The MHSAA is way too busy to worry about whether ejections are rule-based.

After all, they have to check up on their tournament selections to make sure patches are properly worn, shoes are shined and uniform shirts are blue. Rules knowledge and good judgment are nice, but nowhere near as important as compliance with appearance requirements.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by w_sohl

And then they have to review EVERY ejection. They aren't going to set the precedent of having to take the extra step to evaluate whether an ejection should be reviewed or not. Sucks for the kid, but I see their point.

Nonsense. As an administrator I can distinguish between a bona fide objection from one of my officials and the whining of parents and coaches.

[w_sohl]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Nonsense. As an administrator I can distinguish between a bona fide objection from one of my officials and the whining of parents and coaches.

I understand that, but then they have every Tom, Dick and Harry asking for their ejections to be reviewed. They don't have time to sort through all of that.

[DG]

I wonder what the point is of sending in ejection reports if they are not going to be reviewed.

[ref5678]

They are in some places simply sent in to create a paper trail to make sure that ejected parties comply with any suspension requirements, and that they have the documentation to back up said suspension if ever challenged in court. Ie #23 ejected from contest in a state where there is an automatic one game suspension. If an official does not file a special report the state association doesnt have a leg to stand on in enforcing said suspension, and if they did #23 parents takes the state to court and say prove my little johnny was ejected no report no proof.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Before we all go off the deep end here. First not one of us has seen the MichiganHSAA Officials Report that was filed so none of us know what the Game Official reported. Second, yes a Fake Tag is Obstruction per NFHS Rules, but since none of us saw the play maybe there is more to the story than we know. Maybe the Fielder committed some other Unsportsmanlike act while applying the Fake Tag.

MTD, Sr.

[kylejt]

Unsportsmanlike conduct is a judgement call. Always has been. Sure, we have certain things we toss for without hesitation, but many of those aren't in any book, either.

I'm not saying a fake tag is an automatic EJ, far from it. More like a warn and eject, in most cases. But it's on the table, depending on the situation.

If, in the OP's sitation, the umpire said that fake tags are an automatic ejection, that's certainly grounds to revisit the EJ. If not, it's a judgement call, and I can't see it being reviewable.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by kylejt

Unsportsmanlike conduct is a judgement call. Always has been. Sure, we have certain things we toss for without hesitation, but many of those aren't in any book, either.

I'm not saying a fake tag is an automatic EJ, far from it. More like a warn and eject, in most cases. But it's on the table, depending on the situation.

If, in the OP's sitation, the umpire said that fake tags are an automatic ejection, that's certainly grounds to revisit the EJ. If not, it's a judgement call, and I can't see it being reviewable.

In LL and FED a fake tag is, by rule, obstruction. You need something more than the fake tag to elevate it to UC.