Batter interference?

[Harkdulai]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

I think we can "guess" why there was not a protest. The original poster saw the play different from you. You have a different version and my gut tells me
if we asked several people who were at the game we would get a 3rd / 4th version.

Also, you say no interference BUT the batter held his bat high in the air according to the original OP.

Is that part correct according to you?

If so, there is a good case for an interference call. B1 is not supposed to have his bat high in the air when a play is going on.

Also, you said you were UIC so you should be backing the men and women in blue.

Manny was "spot on" in his answer as to why the 4 umpires didn't get together. There was no reason to. The other umpires would be overstepping their bounds had they interjected without the PU asking for help and if you are "truly" a UIC you should know that.

Sounds like you have a grudge against this particular group of umpires.

Pete Booth

I am smart enough to realize that when an unpire makes a mistake they should also be told they made a mistake. I was at the game. A mistake was made. I think it makes a big difference to me that I was at the game and not saying what happened as according to what someone told me. Did I want my brothers team to win, of course, that's why I never unpire their games. But my integrity is more important to me than any game. The plate umpire said he held the bat high. I don't think he did but that's his judgement. I already said that before. Can't argue with that. But the rule is not a judgement. A rule is a rule.
Anyone that knows me knows that rules are important to me.

About the protest. I was not in the conversation between the manager and the umpire. Regardless of that the plate umpire was wrong.

[Harkdulai]

And to me its not an issue anymore. The game is over and will never change. I just hope in the future the rule would be inforced properly. I have made mistakes before. I learn from them. And will make some again.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Harkdulai

I am smart enough to realize that when an unpire makes a mistake they should also be told they made a mistake. I was at the game. A mistake was made. I think it makes a big difference to me that I was at the game and not saying what happened as according to what someone told me. Did I want my brothers team to win, of course, that's why I never unpire their games. But my integrity is more important to me than any game. The plate umpire said he held the bat high. I don't think he did but that's his judgement. I already said that before. Can't argue with that. But the rule is not a judgement. A rule is a rule.
Anyone that knows me knows that rules are important to me.

About the protest. I was not in the conversation between the manager and the umpire. Regardless of that the plate umpire was wrong.

This is a question from a someone who works other sports, so it's out of ignorance.

Does it matter whether the manager requests a protest of the call (judgment) or the penalty (rule)?

Just curious.

[RPatrino]

The process for a protest, as I have been taught, is once the mgr has said he is playing the game under protest, the umpires should get together and discuss the ruling on the field, if they decide to not change it, then the UIC (home plate umpire) makes a notation in the score book about the nature of the protest and game situation at the time.

The umpires should accept any protest given to them, regardless of whether they feel its a valid protest or not. I once had a manager file a protest because the light on the snack bar didn't come on when it was supposed to, which was how the games at this field were called for darkness.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

The process for a protest, as I have been taught, is once the mgr has said he is playing the game under protest, the umpires should get together and discuss the ruling on the field, if they decide to not change it, then the UIC (home plate umpire) makes a notation in the score book about the nature of the protest and game situation at the time.

The umpires should accept any protest given to them, regardless of whether they feel its a valid protest or not. I once had a manager file a protest because the light on the snack bar didn't come on when it was supposed to, which was how the games at this field were called for darkness.

In every universe not Little League, you are correct. In LL, you don't play on after a protest. You twiddle thumbs until the person above gives a ruling, and then some more if the manager insists on pushing it up another level, et cetera ad infinitum.

[RPatrino]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

In every universe not Little League, you are correct. In LL, you don't play on after a protest. You twiddle thumbs until the person above gives a ruling, and then some more if the manager insists on pushing it up another level, et cetera ad infinitum.

That is the protest procedure for LL Tournament play, All-Stars, Regionals, etc. The process I am talking about is for regular season play. Two distinct procedures. The game can be 'played under protest', which is not a decision the umpires get to make. The manager can decide to file it or not file it, but it makes no difference to the game itself.

[nopachunts]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

That is the protest procedure for LL Tournament play, All-Stars, Regionals, etc. The process I am talking about is for regular season play. Two distinct procedures. The game can be 'played under protest', which is not a decision the umpires get to make. The manager can decide to file it or not file it, but it makes no difference to the game itself.

Both of the LL that I call for want a protestable situation settled BEFORE the game continues. Both Little Leagues have a BOD member on-site during regular season games and try to resolve the matter before the game is played under protest. It's much easier to stop the clock and take 5-10 minutes to resolve the situation than to re-start the game later if a protest is upheld.

[RPatrino]

In the leagues I worked with in California, the protest is noted in the score book and the game continues. The manager then files the protest with the league and a protest committee rules on it. My experience has been that the vast majority of LL BOD's have no knowledge of rules, and would be of no help in deciding a protest.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

That is the protest procedure for LL Tournament play, All-Stars, Regionals, etc. The process I am talking about is for regular season play. Two distinct procedures. The game can be 'played under protest', which is not a decision the umpires get to make. The manager can decide to file it or not file it, but it makes no difference to the game itself.

OK, so why were you saying they should have logged the protest and kept playing in the game we're talking about here?

[RPatrino]

Let me try this again:

In LL All Stars and above, a protest is lodged with the game UIC, UIC confers with his/her crew to attempt to resolve, if they can't resolve then UIC confers with the TD who calls "LL HQ" to get a ruling on the play. The umpires don't decide if the protest is valid.

In regular season, the protest procedure is per local league rules.

[PeteBooth]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by Harkdulai

I am smart enough to realize that when an unpire makes a mistake they should also be told they made a mistake.

Told by whom?

here is what you said which is what we are commenting on

The worse part is the the four umpires on the field never got together to discuss the call. If you are going to have four umpires during an all star game you would assume at least one of them would know the rules.

It is you who are UIC that need to know umpire protocol.

Unless there is a protest (which there wasn't) OR the PU requests help, there is no reason for the other umpires to get involved. This has nothing to do with the other umpires knowing the rule or not.

Pete Booth

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Harkdulai

About the protest. I was not in the conversation between the manager and the umpire. Regardless of that the plate umpire was wrong.

Perhaps... and perhaps not. You were not in the conversation. The correctness of the plate umpire's actions (as you should know) depend ENTIRELY on the content of that conversation. On a couple of points.

1) If the manager was "protesting" whether there was interference at all or not (like you said ... pure judgement), the umpire AND the TD were correct in not allowing this protest to move on. Judgement calls are not protestable, and not subject to the "stop everything down and call the next level up" protest procedure.

2) More importantly, and no one has mentioned this yet ... it was said the manager had a fit and got ejected. He CANNOT insist on a protest at this point. He cannot even request one - his words, after his ejection, are entirely moot.

Had the manager been arguing about who should be called out AND used the word "protest" BEFORE he was tossed - then everything else you're being told here is correct - the protest should have been called in and likely (assuming your description of the play and the umpire's description of the play line up).

(One other question ... is it possible the umpire ruled that the batter interfered INTENTIONALLY?)

As you said, you don't know exactly what was discussed between umpire and manager, and it's entirely possible that what the manager says (after the fact) he said and what he actually said differ greatly. I'd be curious to hear not only the PU's version of that conversation but the TD's version of the subsequent conversation... and whether "protest" happened before or after the ejection.