disqualification vs. ejection

[oppool]

question disqualification of a player versus ejection are there circumstances when a player may be disqualified instead of ejection for minor misconduct I have seen umpires remove or disqualify a player instead of ejection under these situations I thought unless it was for using a altered bat or illegal player situations that a player removed from the game must be a ejection. Right or Wrong??


Thanks

Don

[Edited by oppool on Feb 22nd, 2001 at 10:17 PM]

[IRISHMAFIA]

Speaking ASA

Without getting specific, I think you've got the right idea. However, I would probably refer to the deeds resulting in disqualification as "infractions", not "misconduct". Misconduct is going to get a player tossed. On that point, I never, NEVER allow an adult player or coach to remain anywhere near the playing field if they have been ejected. Doesn't make any sense and you may be setting yourself up for a harder time later where your only recourse may be to forfeit the game.

Mike

[SamNVa]

I agree with Mike. In fact, NFHS Rules specifically state that a coach who has been ejected must leave the vicinity (out of sight and sound) or the field and can have no further contact with the participants in the game until the game is over (no cell phone calls from the parking lot. )

Some offenses require immediate ejection such as wearing metal cleats, malicious contact, and fighting. Others can result in ejection or restriction to the bench based on the umpire's judgement as to the severity of the offense.

[Steve M]

Don,
Both Mike & Sam are right. In Pa high school ball, though, we've been instructed that even ejected players are put on the bench. We're told that sending them to the bus or away with a school district official isn't to be done. But the coach is out of sight & sound. Now, I can't recall ever ejecting a high school player, so I don't see that as a problem area. My only restrictions were for helemt violations or something along that line.
If technical violation, restrict. If it's an ejection that somebody has asked for, make 'em happy and give 'em the ejection.
A lot of the ASA leagues around here require that an ejected player be out for the next game (maybe more), where a restricted player may play the next game. If the umps you're talking about, Don, are playing this kind of game - they're asking & demanding trouble from players.

[oppool]

yeah, what I've seen is a umpire removing or disqualifing a player instead of ejection for cussing maybe just saying the sh#* word which the team may be playing with the minimum number of players or trying to save the player from the league minimum 2 game suspension for ejection. I didnt believe this was correct but had seen and heard other umpire impling.

[Steve M]

Don,
This may well be a case where the ump weakly enforcing a rule or changing a rule to be a "nice guy" will actually back-fire at some point. It goes back to that integrity thing - once an ump loses that or damages it (even if just in league play), it's going to take years to undo that damage. Now, as for cussin', in our adult leagues, that's just part of their normal vocabulary. Unless it is really loud (I mean loud enough that folks outside the park can hear it), directed at me, or about me, it does not violate our understanding of the rules. Understand also that our adult leagues here seldom have many fans and none of them are kids. Also, I meet with the league officers before the season begins - actually I attend all of the league meetings - and I agree that the umps will enforce language violations as the league wants it done. Remember, these guys are speaking on the field as they do everywhere else, so cussing is not violating any standard that they can understand. The teams that frequent any tournaments do not participate in any on-field cussing.