![]() |
|
|||
|
Quote:
In the scenario offered, the coach made it clear that he wasn't concerned about the control and wasn't going to remove the pitcher. My concern isn't the coach's feelings, but the batters. I'm also not talking about 1 or 2 hit batters. I'm talking about more than a half-dozen in a few inning and it being beyond doubt that the pitcher has a problem. As a 12 yo is being loaded into an ambulance with a broken ankle, arm, torn-up knee after being the 10th batter hit by a pitcher, I would like you to turn to the parents and tell them that is wasn't your issue. I'm not talking about changing or making up rules, but strictly working within the wording of the book. Just because I have $5,000,000 liability insurance doesn't mean I want to test my coverage. ASA made the "injury above rules" statement when they permitted umpires to stop play and award bases due to an injured player. I don't necessarily care for it, but it places the onus on the umpire to be an authoritive figure on the field when it comes to a player's well being. Telling a jury that you didn't do anything because it isn't covered in a rule book probably will not get you off the hook. If asked for a rule book reference, I would undoubtedly cite 10.1. Mr. Greene can probably jump in on how it would wash in a courtroom, but to be honest, I don't put that much faith on however many individuals are in the box accepting the "game" over what they would perceive as a common sense move. JMHO,
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball. |
| Bookmarks |
|
|