ASA Rules

R1 on 3B, 2 Outs.

D3K, F2 throws out BR at 1B.

While it doesnt affect the game because the BR was out, coach of D team comes out with rule book in hand and says BR cannot run to an unoccupied 1B on 2 outs on a D3K and reads me 8.1.B.

I simply told her she was incorrect and misreading it and left it at that. She didnt agree but accepted the decision. FED rules are written much clearer and case plays are clear on this, but after the game I was reading the rule and I do see how a coach could misinterpret this. At a minimum, at least a coach is trying to read the rules but how can it be explained?

Cite (paraphrased):

The batter becomes a BR
B. On F2 D3K when
1. There are fewer than two outs and first base in unoccupied at the time of the pitch, or
2. There are two outs and first basee is occupied. This is called the third strik rule.

I'm not sure what I would do... but I know how quick I would do it. :)

The batter becomes a BR
B. On F2 D3K when
1. There are fewer than two outs and first base is unoccupied at the time of the pitch, or
2. There are two outs and first base is occupied. This is called the third strike rule.

R1 on 3B, 2 Outs.

D3K, F2 throws out BR at 1B.

While it doesnt affect the game because the BR was out, coach of D team comes out with rule book in hand and says BR cannot run to an unoccupied 1B on 2 outs on a D3K and reads me 8.1.B.

**(1)..If the coach cannot understand this rule, she's a moron, and needs reading comprehension help.
**(2)..Come onto my field with a rule book, and you're heading to the parking lot.

Bob



[Edited by bluezebra on Apr 24th, 2005 at 02:00 PM]

Really?

Thats two blues in a row who would eject for that?

That never crossed my mind in all honesty. Not even when I wrote it here (although i probably should have anticipated it). Maybe the way I wrote it made it seem like she was aggressive and came rushing out or something, she wasnt.. just bringing out a rule book. She barely even slowed my sunflower seed refill during warm up pitches. I just told her and she left saying "I dont know about that" but didnt say another peep. I got no prob with that. Its not a judgement question, its a rules question and coaches are justified in asking those IMO.

I always get a kick on how quick on the trigger people are on the MBs. I wonder if they really are that quick in a game or if its a front.

Nope. I didn't say that.

I am not sure I would eject her. Probably, but not definitely. I cannot think of a case where a rulebook on the field would not be a case of a coach trying to show the umpire up. I've been umpiring since 1989 and have never had a rule book brought out on me.

Innocent or not, I do know that I would not allow the discussion to happen with her having a rule book. If I thought it was just a mistake, I would immediately warn her and send her back to the dugout to put the book up. If she wants to discuss it without the rule book, I'm good with that.

BTW... I seem to remember this rule being discussed previously on this board and I believe the wording is planning to be changed.

Also, BTW... Do you really think she had never been on a ball field in her life and didn't understand this misprint? Or do you suspect that she might have been trying to pick boogers?

Didn't we beat the crap out of this topic last year?

I submitted the change to correct the rule and was told it would be taken care of through housekeeping.

Through all the changes made, this change was omitted. I received an apology from some NUS members and was told it would be changed this coming fall. I will send them a reminder :)

BTW, the coach coming on to the field with the rule book is a dangerous proposition when done either PRIOR to questioning the umpire's ruling or in a manner which would project their presence on the field questioning an umpire's authority. They do that and they are most likely gone.

OK mike.. thanks. I dont know, we've talked about D3K a million times but I didnt remember if this particular issue was resolved.



hmmm I dont know.. I didnt think about it in terms you guys are but it is a different perspective... I just figured it was a coach who didnt know the rules.. but with the caveat that at a minimum, they picked a rule book up.

Its possible they were trying to show me up but like I said I didnt think about it that way as I was more than sure that this was a nonstarter debate. Dunno if I need to get meaner or not I just dont take things in that way I guess unless their attitude makes it clear that is what they are trying to do. I know the D3K rule so any debate is done before it even begins.

Since I wasn't around last year and I am this year and I have my 2005 ASA Rule Book in hand... Is this rule, 8.1.B, that I'm currently looking at suppose to read differently????

Dig on Fed's pretty friggin clearly written rule: (paraphrased but you'll still see the difference in the way its written)

8.1.1

Batter becomes a BR

When catcher fails to catch the 3rd strike before the ball touches the ground when fewer than 2 outs and 1B unooccupied at time of pitch or anytime there are 2 outs.

----------------------

Thats all you need to say about D3K.. ASA tries to get fancy with one of the oldest rules there is..

Yes, it should just read:

2. There are two outs.

If this coach was anything but a first year coach at 12U, she was attempting to get away with one, and further she was thinking she could put one over on YOU.

She, by demeanor or otherwise, would have to convince me that this was anything BUT trying to sneak one by the dumb umpire.

So, I would not be taking her too seriously.

I'm thinking it would go like this,

"No coach, the rule writers are not logic majors. It is a misprint."

(If the coach perists, and she is experienced or above 12U)

(ginnning)"C'mon, coach, let's play. I'm not falling for that."

(If she persists, further action is likely, maybe not ejection, but at least a serious-tone warning to return to her bench.)

With a newby coach, especially early in the year, this is a teachable moment, and that is the approach I would initially take.