That was my point. I have no problem with coaches being involved in the rules process. However, as we have all seen, sometimes is can get to the point of absurdity. I'm not particularly fond of the arrogance, or is it disdain, some coaches show towards officials.

Quote:

The main points of emphasis in this year's clinic were "Obstruction, batter interference and hit by pitch". These were the things that the coaches and the umpire evaluators felt that were not consistantly called. It is also where the wiley players were working on their acting skills in an attempt to help their team.

I guess this is part of my problem with the coaches' input. They recognize that they have coaches who are intentionally coaching in a manner which places a player in jeopardy. However, instead of a little in-house administrative action, they dictate the rule interps and place the onus on the umpires to cover their collective tails.

Quote:

I'm not ripping on the ASA. I knew umpires that were calling about to receive if the ball was in the infield.

And that is a baseball influence that somewhere along the way must be exercised to insure softball games are called by softball rules.

Quote:

I've known coaches that said they were going to teach their kids to obstruct because they wanted to take the chance to get the out. The punishment was only that they would be safe anyway.

That just isn't true. I have seen players who have been recognized as intentionally or habitually obstructed runners, be given a warning and then ejected for unsportsmanlike conduct if such action continued. There is no problem with this and a good umpire will take that action without hesitation or fear of being chastised for doing their job. The problem here is that coaches are so used to getting their way, a coach caught will attempt to "red line" (or whatever designation is used in your area) that umpire and that just isn't right. I'm not saying this is prevelant, but I have seen this occur in NCAA, NFHS and ASA. I know an ASA Elite and ISF Certified umpire who could not work a local Div I university as the coach simply would not allow him on HER field.

Quote:

It is the umpire that will make the right call even if it will cause an arguement. If all the umpires are consistantly calling something it won't be argued anymore it will be expected.

And as the NCAA takes more control of the softball officials, many of the problems should be resolved. However, there are still a bundle of GAGA umpires around who will adjust their game to the coach's desires as opposed to the rules. And I don't think that is a good thing at anytime.

Sorry for the rant and, of course, JMHO,


[Edited by IRISHMAFIA on Jan 23rd, 2005 at 06:47 PM]

Mike:
I agree with you. That is why the umpires that do the NCAA must go to the clinics.

Emily is quite thin blooded....she gets her jacket out when the temp drops below 70 degrees....

To be honest, baseball is moving in the direction of "no ball, no block."

Matter of fact, the NCAA was the first major rules body to put this in place. No ball? Obstruction. All obstruction is delayed dead, too, in NCAA baseball (like NFHS, but very much unlike the OBR).

--Rich

I think that is a good thing. When I mentioned a "baseball influence", I am basically referring to people emulating what was once a given in baseball and what they see on TV.

Quote:

Matter of fact, the NCAA was the first major rules body to put this in place. No ball? Obstruction. All obstruction is delayed dead, too, in NCAA baseball (like NFHS, but very much unlike the OBR). --Rich

Really, I thought it was ISF who raised the issue at the turn of the century, but couldn't put it in the book until 2001. Nonetheless, the rule is still a good one as a player putting themselves in front of a potential play, I believe, has a better chance of getting the throw clean for a put out than if they need to go for the ball while tangling with a runner.

Thanks,

In the NCAA if they are tangling with the runner without the ball it is obstruction. The question is where is the ball when when the fielder blocks? If it is closer to the fielder of the thrown ball than the runner is, it is fine no obstruction. If the runner is closer to the fielder of the thrown ball than the ball then it is obstruction.

If the defenders position (without the ball) causes the runner to change her path to the bag then it is obstruction. The reason for the emphasis is to ensure that the college umpires call this consistantly.

The NCAA may eventually go to the "no ball - no block" but for now they would like the umpires to be more consistant in calling obstruction instead of just calling the runner safe. Those of you that have been to Emily's clinic please chime in. This is the message I got from the clinic I attended.

I'll agree, Rachel - that's pretty much what I saw & heard the emphasis to be at the Philly clinic.