Would a strike be called on the batter if the coach is taking out lines.

If you are talking NFHS, you could. The rule applies to "team personnel" and "any lines on the field of play." Those lines are part of the rules because they define where a coach has to be prior to the release of the pitch.

But I probably wouldn't (unless the coach was being a jerk about other things!).

WMB

Do we all agree that boxes and foul/fair limits exist, even if the "lines" are missing?

I agree with W.M. Blue....you could call a strike, but I wouldn't unless the team had been warned.
Also, I agree the boxes are there the entire game. You can still call a batter out if a slap hitter runs out of the box and hits the ball late in the second game of a doubleheader even if there is no evidence that a batters box ever exsisted.

Of all the question they could have put on the test about erasing lines they just had to choose that play.. Can't understand the logic

Since the test is not only open book, but open discussion, I have assumed the test has the primary objective of requiring the umpire to re-aquaint himself/herself with the book.

In that light, a question where you have to consider a situation that is less than obvious will have you think about not only the rule, but the enforcement of the rule. That makes this an excellent question on the erasing the lines rule.

That, and the other primary objective of the NFHS test... nobody scores 100%! :D

Logic and the test? Now THAT is funny...

This is the truth...I proctored the Part I NFHS test last night for about 30 experienced umpires. Most scores were 95 and up, but no 100's.

We give the test as an open book, individual test. No discussion. We do provide a reference sheet that lists the page number in the rulebook where the applicable rule can be found for each question.

I have always maintained that NFHS rules tests for all sports are as much reading tests as they are rules tests.

SC is neither open book nor open discussion. In our local association of 35 people, we a couple of 92s and three 91s. I think it was quite a bit tougher this year than normal.

The new rule refers to intentionally removing lines. A strike or ball is to be assessed, and a team warning issued. For subsequent violations the head coach is ejected.

According to our state rules interpreter, at the national meeting in Indiana they stressed that this was a reaction to what Fed considers cheating, or at least an attempt to influence the umpire.

So why warn before assessing a ball or strike?

Mike

According to the NFHS website, from one of their situations:
SITUATION 10: In the top of the first inning, the lead-off batter for the visiting team starts kicking out the front line of the batter’s box as she enters the box. The umpire calls “time” and issues a strike on the batter. The umpire also issues a team warning to the offending head coach. Four innings later, the base umpire notices the first base coach on the visiting team removing the lines of the coach’s box. RULING: The base umpire shall call “time” and restrict the head coach to the dugout for the remainder of the game. Also, the plate umpire shall issue a “strike” on the batter. (3-6-17)

Talk about nonsense rules and stretching my willingness to apply all of them verbatim.
As I said earlier "boxes and foul/fair limits exist, even if the "lines" are missing"

Certainly lines disappear routinely during the course of a game. But why do you think the coach is deliberately removing them?

Mike

So the coach removes lines and we can penalize him. But what if he leaves the lines alone, but wanders all over the place? Can we penalize him? (NFHS)

If yes, what is penalty, and what is rule?


WMB

I think the main reason for putting in the rule was the slap hitters werre erasing the line to try to gain an avantage and FED felt the coaches were telling thier player's to do it . so that is why the coach penalty.