NFHS Update

[wadeintothem]

Apples and Oranges bandit IMO... I think you are confusing the two issues. The DESIGNATED bullpen/dugout areas and "confines of the field" are not the same issue.

its the designated bullpen, what you "believe" that should be or how it should be set up is/should be discussed in the pregame with the coaches.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally posted by wadeintothem

#1 sucks that they messed that up... and it will do no good that 14 umpires on Official Forum will know its a mess up and every coach player and parent will simply read the rule book....

With all due respect, the last thing I am worried about is the high school coaches, players, or parents reading a mistake in the current rule book. After all, how many of us were seriously challenged by ASA misstating the D3K rule for two years?

I would be more worried about the umpires getting the right interpretation.

[Edited by AtlUmpSteve on Feb 1st, 2006 at 11:47 AM]

[wadeintothem]

Originally posted by AtlUmpSteve

The last thing I am worried about is the high school coaches, players, or parents reading a mistake in the current rule book. After all, how many of us were seriously challenged by ASA misstating the D3K rule for two years?

I would be more worried about the umpires getting the right interpretation. [/B]

I had that friggin D3K thing come up in a 14U Travel tourney last summer by some momma pulling her rule book out of her purse.. it was good for a chuckle and she was ignored out of hand.

Not really the same situation though, because D3K is and always will be D3K so a screw up is fine.. this is a rule that was rewritten to the way it was two years ago and actually a major change when brought down, now appearing to be reversed.

We can coin a new term here though - "NFHS D3K'd it in the book".

I have a meeting NFHS meeting this coming monday and I'm going to ask the area UIC about his thoughts on this, I printed up the post, he may not even know anything about it at all one way or the other.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by AtlUmpSteve
After all, how many of us were seriously challenged by ASA misstating the D3K rule for two years?


[Edited by AtlUmpSteve on Feb 1st, 2006 at 11:47 AM]

Not to mention the correction on when a runner can score at the 10U. That was corrected the first time out.

[Bandit]

OK, your right I am confused. This thread has jumped all over creation. But. One item I am not confused about is the designated bullpen/dugout area and "confines of the field" being the same issue. You still cannot "create" a desigated bullpen outside of a fenced field and allow players to warmup in such an area. As item #4 of the post by WestMichBlue suggests.

[wadeintothem]

whatchu talkin bout willis..

now you got me confused "create a bullpin outside of a fenced field" ??

Ive seen many different fields with many different setups so I'm having trouble following what you are saying.

[Bandit]

Originally posted by WestMichBlue
NFHS Update

4. What are “confines of the field?” His reply: “We define the confines of the field as inside the fence. I have advised officials that if they see a pitcher warming up outside the confines of the field, it is good practice to suggest to a coach between innings that a mask/head protector for the non-adult person doing the catching is advisable.”

WMB

"If they see a pitcher warming up OUTSIDE the confines of the field, it is a good practice to SUGGEST to a coach that a mask/head protector for the non-adult person doing the catching is advisable" ?????

NO it is not "suggestable" per NFHS. It is ADVISABLE to have the PITCHER and NON-ADULT person (assumming that it is another player, and not simply some fan) to return to the "confines" of the field ! I cannot believe that Randy Allen, a member of the NFHS Softball Rules Committee, would "suggest" to a coach to stay "outside" the confines of the field when NFHS rules clearly state the opposite. Is not that what his item # 4 is stating?

[WestMichBlue]

Confines of the field. What is the problem here? There is no rule conflict.

For purpose of player safety, the NFHS has told its umpires that they are responsible for insuring use of safety equipment inside the fence! Though we do not have responsibility or liability for actions outside the fence, the NFHS has suggested that we be a little proactive and let a coach know when his player is not safely protected.

I have never been on a high school field that has warm-up areas (“bullpen”) inside the fence. I have been on fields where the players warm up out of sight (behind a dugout or utility building or where-ever.) How can I be liable for them if I cannot see them – or if I am paying attention to what is going on inside the fence?

Another rule (3.6.6) requires that players and coaches not currently active on the playing surface be in either the bench/dug out area or the designated bullpen area. The coach or the school defines the bullpen, and it may be alongside the fence or behind the utility building or in the parking lot. Regardless of where it is, it is legal for players and coaches to be there during the game.

Note also that we have no authority on number of players or what they do in the bullpen. It is legal for five players to congregate in the bullpen and talk on their cell phones. If, however, they are socializing in the stands, then we can penalize them.

Of course we have to use some common sense and not penalize a player that goes to the concession building to get a drink or use the restroom even though they are violating a strict interpretation of 3.6.6.

WMB

[wadeintothem]

Originally posted by Bandit

"If they see a pitcher warming up OUTSIDE the confines of the field, it is a good practice to SUGGEST to a coach that a mask/head protector for the non-adult person doing the catching is advisable" ?????

NO it is not "suggestable" per NFHS. It is ADVISABLE to have the PITCHER and NON-ADULT person (assumming that it is another player, and not simply some fan) to return to the "confines" of the field ! I cannot believe that Randy Allen, a member of the NFHS Softball Rules Committee, would "suggest" to a coach to stay "outside" the confines of the field when NFHS rules clearly state the opposite. Is not that what his item # 4 is stating?

I guess it depends on how you are reading his "confines of the field" ... maybe you are imagining the pitcher warming up in the parking lot.. whereas when I read his comments I see a pitcher warming up in a dead ball bullpen..perhaps attached to the dugout or whatever.

[Andy]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by wadeintothem

I guess it depends on how you are reading his "confines of the field" ... maybe you are imagining the pitcher warming up in the parking lot.. whereas when I read his comments I see a pitcher warming up in a dead ball bullpen..perhaps attached to the dugout or whatever.

I started the "confines of the field" question with this thread: http://www.officialforum.com/thread/24272

For the purposes of the rule cited in that thread, I interpreted the confines as any area I could see while on the field. That interpretation was challenged, so I went to a different member of the NFHS rules committee for an interpretation. I got basically the same response as WMB did.

Going forward, I will "suggest" or "recommend" to the coach that any non-adult warming up a pitcher outside the fence wear the proper protection. If this is happening inside the field fences, I will require that proper protection be worn.

[CecilOne]

Two weeks ago I said
"I treat the "bullpen" standard warmup area as part of the confiness of teh field, even if confined only by concept. I believe that is the intent of the rule because we know NFHS leans toward safety.
Beyond that, if I notice such action, I say "Coach, the warmup catcher isn't wearing a mask"; in a friendly advice tone. Also because we know NFHS leans toward safety plus we don't want a game delayed. "

Based on all the discussion and mostly the pronouncements from NFHS RC, I will only treat the bullpen as within the confines if inside the fence. That is in spite of my philosophical disagreement and my wondering why the rule says "confines" if it really means "fence".

DA question - If there also is a fence outside the bullpen which attaches to the inner field fence, which one applies?

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally posted by CecilOne
Based on all the discussion and mostly the pronouncements from NFHS RC, I will only treat the bullpen as within the confines if inside the fence. That is in spite of my philosophical disagreement and my wondering why the rule says "confines" if it really means "fence".

DA question - If there also is a fence outside the bullpen which attaches to the inner field fence, which one applies?

If it said fence instead of confines, then someone would need an interpretation of how to address a field without a fence confining it .

In my opinion, a fence attaching a bullpen area to the field would serve to attach the bullpen to the confines. In that case, the first fence wouldn't be defining the confines of the field; it would be defining the live ball territory.