Slung the bat

I think you use Rule 10

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by softball_junky

I think you use Rule 10

I don't believe that applies. There is a standing ruling from the ASA Director of Umpires that absent intent, there is no penalty. In order to rule USC, you must rule intent (ie, thrown in anger).

Since there is a ruling, you cannot use the rule that says you can decide when there is no ruling that applies.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

I don't believe that applies. There is a standing ruling from the ASA Director of Umpires that absent intent, there is no penalty. In order to rule USC, you must rule intent (ie, thrown in anger).

Since there is a ruling, you cannot use the rule that says you can decide when there is no ruling that applies.

Actually, POE #52 covers it.

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

I don't believe that applies. There is a standing ruling from the ASA Director of Umpires that absent intent, there is no penalty. In order to rule USC, you must rule intent (ie, thrown in anger).

Since there is a ruling, you cannot use the rule that says you can decide when there is no ruling that applies.

Thanks Steve that does make sense. What I was thinking if the bat was thrown in a way that you felt was a safety issue and there is no rule stating that the act is illegal you could use rule 10 and at least give a warning that if it happened again the player could be disqualified. I don’t' have my book with me but I' will check POE #52 as Mike said.

[mcrowder]

We should try not to lean too hard on rule 10. I know some umpires (not saying you are one), and have read others here, who seem to think rule 10 gives them authority to invent rulings on things that ARE covered in the book. Rule 10 really should only be used when the event in question TRULY is not covered in the book. I suspect 1 time per year per umpire is too often.

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

We should try not to lean too hard on rule 10. I know some umpires (not saying you are one), and have read others here, who seem to think rule 10 gives them authority to invent rulings on things that ARE covered in the book. Rule 10 really should only be used when the event in question TRULY is not covered in the book. I suspect 1 time per year per umpire is too often.

I don't remember ever invoking rule 10.

[umpiregal65]

Originally Posted by Dakota

NFHS 3-6-2.

The PENALTY is printed after 3-6-12.

Although from your description, I may have applied 3-6-18, which would have resulted in ejection (especially the second time).

I don't have a NFHS book yet but this is what i would do in my judgement.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by umpiregal65

I don't have a NFHS book yet but this is what i would do in my judgement.

fyi,... the only difference between the rules I referenced and the ones that DTTB quotes are the rule numbers. I do have the 2005 book at work.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by Skahtboi

I don't remember ever invoking rule 10.

I have once. A fence fell into the field as a play was going on, and interfered with play. Both coaches protested our ruling on the field, and our only backup was rule 10.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

I have once. A fence fell into the field as a play was going on, and interfered with play. Both coaches protested our ruling on the field, and our only backup was rule 10.

What was wrong with the rule on de fence-ive interference?

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by Dakota

What was wrong with the rule on de fence-ive interference?

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by Dakota

What was wrong with the rule on de fence-ive interference?

Been a while since I laughed out loud here. Nice.