The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 04, 2005, 08:33am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 120
Sorry guys and gals... it really seems to me we're all out of track. IMO a rubber band on a wrist cannot NEVER NEVER NEVER be jewelry in the way the Rulebook intend it and it NEVER NEVER NEVER cannot be a safety issue.

JMO

A.
__________________
Antonella
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 04, 2005, 08:55am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 15
This past weekend at a 10U tournament, a coach told me that one of her players broke a finger when it got caught in an opponent's LiveStrong band on a sliding tag play. I hadn't made players take them off before, but that changed my mind.

__________________
John
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 04, 2005, 10:02am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,551
Quote:
Originally posted by blue_ape
This past weekend at a 10U tournament, a coach told me that one of her players broke a finger when it got caught in an opponent's LiveStrong band on a sliding tag play. I hadn't made players take them off before, but that changed my mind.

Then why wouldn't you make them remove their clothes, sweatbands and gloves because those items can cause the same injury if another player's finger is entangled with them during a play?

__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 04, 2005, 10:16am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 120
That's it.
Agree with you, Mike.
I was thinkin' exactly the same and you wrote it.

A.
__________________
Antonella
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 04, 2005, 12:14pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 573
You know, an easier way to deal with this is the uniform rule.

If the whole team is wearing them, ignore it if they aren't all wearing it, comply with the uniform rule.

Persoanlly, I want all jewelry removed.

Years ago, I was one of three officials sued over a stud earring that we didn't see on a player.

My insurance settled as did the others.

Jewelry is for adornment, it has no place or use as a sporting device.

GET RID OF IT.

I have told adults to get rid of some earrings, and some necklaces but for the kids, toss it all.

However on the upside, if you have a metal detector work over the infield after a game and you might find some good stuff.
I sure have in years past.......diamond rings, earrings etc.

__________________
ISF
ASA/USA Elite
NIF
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Fri Aug 05, 2005, 04:02am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Almere (NL)
Posts: 370
Yesterday (thursday) the Dutch pro-soccer referees came together, because competition will start next weekend. They were ORDERED to get rid off all jewelry, INCL. rubber wristbands (such as LiveStrong).
I can imagine in all kinds of sport and in any league the UIC can/will/must give some points of notice for the next season. In the Neth.'s we do so for several years now. IMHO we should get rid off it now, but why not start taking action at the beginning of a competition? In that case all players can take notice off it and are warned in advance. When we take action during competition, you can have the argument: "Last weekend we could wear them. Why not now?" or things like that...
__________________
Sander




Ik ben niet gek, doe alleen alsof! Gaat me goed af toch?
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Fri Aug 05, 2005, 08:54am
VaASAump
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Agree with Mike. ASA Rulebook does not say "ALL jewelry has to be removed."

Worked an ASA 16U/18U college showcase last weekend. Were told that all jewelry had to be removed. This presented a problem, as any unsigned player was wearing a colored wristband, designating school year. Made it easy for college scouts/coaches. But of course, there were some umpires who were trying to have ball players remove these bands as they were "jewelry." Glad it got resolved before it got ugly.

Serg
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old Fri Aug 05, 2005, 10:59am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,551
Quote:
Originally posted by VaASAump
Agree with Mike. ASA Rulebook does not say "ALL jewelry has to be removed."

Worked an ASA 16U/18U college showcase last weekend. Were told that all jewelry had to be removed. This presented a problem, as any unsigned player was wearing a colored wristband, designating school year. Made it easy for college scouts/coaches. But of course, there were some umpires who were trying to have ball players remove these bands as they were "jewelry." Glad it got resolved before it got ugly.

Serg
Had the same thing happen here a couple of weeks ago. Even after being told the purpose of the wristband, there was an umpire who still wanted it removed. Don't think he'll be back next year.

BTW, Serg, when am I going to see Tidewater's check for the umpire's tournament

__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old Fri Aug 05, 2005, 12:19pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,363
Quote:
Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA

Had the same thing happen here a couple of weeks ago. Even after being told the purpose of the wristband, there was an umpire who still wanted it removed. Don't think he'll be back next year.


At the risk of losing an assignment, although trainable,
1) if we think an item is dangerous, aren't we ethically and by rule required to disallow it?
2) doesn't safety, real or perceived, come before college recruiting?
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT.
It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be.
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Fri Aug 05, 2005, 01:49pm
VaASAump
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
Quote:
Originally posted by VaASAump
Agree with Mike. ASA Rulebook does not say "ALL jewelry has to be removed."

Worked an ASA 16U/18U college showcase last weekend. Were told that all jewelry had to be removed. This presented a problem, as any unsigned player was wearing a colored wristband, designating school year. Made it easy for college scouts/coaches. But of course, there were some umpires who were trying to have ball players remove these bands as they were "jewelry." Glad it got resolved before it got ugly.

Serg
Had the same thing happen here a couple of weeks ago. Even after being told the purpose of the wristband, there was an umpire who still wanted it removed. Don't think he'll be back next year.

BTW, Serg, when am I going to see Tidewater's check for the umpire's tournament

Mike, I'll get back to you on the check.
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Fri Aug 05, 2005, 03:02pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,551


PLEASE NOTE: The tournaments which were referenced by Serg and myself were specifically held for the purpose of college recruiting.

People can carry on all the arguments they please, there is no way anyone can believe the wristbands which are the point of discussion in this thread can be dangerous as it relates to softball and not be over officious.

JMHO,

__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old Mon Aug 08, 2005, 10:56am
SRW SRW is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Seattle area
Posts: 1,342
Re: MLB

Quote:
Originally posted by SRW
Interesting photo here regarding wristbands...


Los Angeles Angels batter Garret Anderson (R) and home plate umpire Paul Nauert (L) watch his two-run home run off New York Yankees pitcher Mike Mussina in the second inning of their game in New York's Yankee Stadium July 29, 2005. The hit proved to be all that was needed as the Angels won 4-1. Photo by Ray Stubblebine/Reuters
Interesting: Same umpire, 7 days later...


Florida Marlins manager Jack McKeon, right, argues with home plate umpire Paul Nauert (96) in the eighth inning, Saturday, Aug. 6, 2005, in Cincinnati. McKeon was arguing a third strike. Cincinnati won, 4-3. (AP Photo/Tony Tribble)
__________________
We see with our eyes. Fans and parents see with their hearts.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:13pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1