You make the call

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Speaking ASA, there is clearly no rule to back up the OUT call, but there is a case play (or used to be - I don't have a case book beyond the '04 book... I think it is about time I ordered a new one...) 10.8-1 that supports calling a player out for "flagrant misconduct" and the play is, in fact, a batter who just hit a home run. The batter is ruled out, ejected, his run does not count, and the runner on 3rd base is returned. The case play is silent on whether the runner on 3rd had or had not already scored, but since the flagrant miscondut in the play was throwing the bat in anger, I would assume he had not scored yet.

That case play is the interpretation Mike was referring to earlier in this thread.

I do recall that caseplay, and recall a great deal of banter both here and at a clinic. The result at the clinic was that there was no rules-basis for the caseplay, and in cases where a caseplay and the rulebook contradict, we go with the rulebook. If I recall correctly here, the situation devolved quickly but the main point of those arguing FOR an out was that the ball was still live during the misconduct and ejection (I don't agree with that either, but it is a distinctive point between that one and the OP here). In this case, the runner is running out an award and the ball is dead.

In any case, an umpire ruling an out on an ejection is doing so without the backing of a rule (I guess rule 10 would be his only backing).

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

I do recall that caseplay, and recall a great deal of banter both here and at a clinic. The result at the clinic was that there was no rules-basis for the caseplay, and in cases where a caseplay and the rulebook contradict, we go with the rulebook. If I recall correctly here, the situation devolved quickly but the main point of those arguing FOR an out was that the ball was still live during the misconduct and ejection (I don't agree with that either, but it is a distinctive point between that one and the OP here). In this case, the runner is running out an award and the ball is dead.

In any case, an umpire ruling an out on an ejection is doing so without the backing of a rule (I guess rule 10 would be his only backing).

The 2005/06 Case Book cites rule 10-8a, 10-1j3 and 10-1k-correct rule interpretation for flagrant misconduct. Page 108.

Rule 10 identifies guidelines for umpires and identfies general information with the caveat:

The plate umpire shall have the authority to make decisions on any situations not specifically covered in THESE rules.

And, failure of umpires to adhere to Rule 10 shall not be grounds for protest.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by jimpiano

The 2005/06 Case Book cites rule 10-8a, 10-1j3 and 10-1k-correct rule interpretation for flagrant misconduct. Page 108.

Rule 10 identifies guidelines for umpires and identfies general information with the caveat:

The plate umpire shall have the authority to make decisions on any situations not specifically covered in THESE rules.

And, failure of umpires to adhere to Rule 10 shall not be grounds for protest.

I've always thought that rule 10 was used too heavily by many umpires to add outs where outs are not provided for in the rules. I also think that THIS situation is clear cut enough (and frequent enough) that if the rulesmakers wanted us to call an out on a player ejected during a live ball or while an award was being run off during a dead ball, that they would have put it into the "The runner is out when..." section.

That said, I understand both the motivation and the opinions of those who feel differently.

Unlike the other 2 threads we disagreed on, which were straight-up rule disagreements ... this one, I believe, falls much further into the grey-area in which we both could easily and equally support our decisions to either call an out or not call an out in the situation posted in the OP.

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

I've always thought that rule 10 was used too heavily by many umpires to add outs where outs are not provided for in the rules. I also think that THIS situation is clear cut enough (and frequent enough) that if the rulesmakers wanted us to call an out on a player ejected during a live ball or while an award was being run off during a dead ball, that they would have put it into the "The runner is out when..." section.

That said, I understand both the motivation and the opinions of those who feel differently.

Unlike the other 2 threads we disagreed on, which were straight-up rule disagreements ... this one, I believe, falls much further into the grey-area in which we both could easily and equally support our decisions to either call an out or not call an out in the situation posted in the OP.

Yes. I agree with you and Dakota.

[greymule]

I've just searched the case book, and apparently that throwing-the-bat-in-anger play has not been incorporated. But the words "flagrant misconduct" do ring a bell. It takes more than just USC for a runner to be called out.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by greymule

I've just searched the case book, and apparently that throwing-the-bat-in-anger play has not been incorporated. But the words "flagrant misconduct" do ring a bell. It takes more than just USC for a runner to be called out.

If the case play is missing from the 2007 case book, that would support Mike's comment about the current NUS being annoyed at the former NUS member's interpretation here. Perhaps someone has purged all official memory that he was ever there, kind of like trying to find a picture of a former USSR Premier once the guard had changed at the top?

Actually, the rules basis for the case play always was very shaky, especially since throwing a bat in anger, as well as other forms of flagrant misconcuct, IS covered in the rules (which makes relying on the God Rule questionable).

As a matter of game management and general principle, I did kind of like the case play interpretation, though.

[bkbjones]

Originally Posted by jimpiano

You are not a news reporter taking notes at the scene of a fight.

I disagree. I believe Wade is right on about taking notes. If there is an ejection in a case like this, I do have to file an incident report and an ejection report. Same if there is a fight or whatever. It would behoove any umpire worth their salt to make notes of who was ejected, involved in a fight, etc. Relying on one's memory can be dangerous. Write it down. Take notes.

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by bkbjones

I disagree. I believe Wade is right on about taking notes. If there is an ejection in a case like this, I do have to file an incident report and an ejection report. Same if there is a fight or whatever. It would behoove any umpire worth their salt to make notes of who was ejected, involved in a fight, etc. Relying on one's memory can be dangerous. Write it down. Take notes.

Dakota's actions were first to stop a fight from happening, which he did successfully by ejecting the batter/runner. I would have done the same thing and made any notes after the players were gone and the situation was diffused.

[JPRempe]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

Here's something that happened to me last year, and I want to see what you all think of it...

In this league, teams have a 2 over-the-fence home run limit. The team on offense has already hit one out. R1 is on third with 2 outs. B2 steps up and hits one over the fence. R1 trots home and touches home plate. As the batter rounds third, the pitcher says something unsportsmanlike that I didn't hear (but my partner heard it). Before the batter touches home plate (still 45 feet or so away), he starts yelling and cursing, heading towards the mound (ignoring home plate) to get ready to fight. I immediately eject him, and my partner ejects the pitcher.

So...

1 - Does R1 count?
2 - Does the home run count towards their limit?
3 - Does B2 count as a run?
4 - How many outs ya got?

I'd just like to see what everyone says to this.

1 - Does R1 count? Yes - scored before the ejection
2 - Does the home run count towards their limit? Yes- OTFHR was hit before the ejection
3 - Does B2 count as a run? Depends - Does the B/R have to touch all four bases in this league, or is the score automatically awarded when he went yard? (local rules will/can govern this answer)
4 - How many outs ya got? I have 2 outs, but again local rules can govern this play based on ejected players.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by greymule

I've just searched the case book, and apparently that throwing-the-bat-in-anger play has not been incorporated. But the words "flagrant misconduct" do ring a bell. It takes more than just USC for a runner to be called out.

This interpretation was a Henry rule. There was never a specific rule to back up the interpretation, but linking a few rules together, the supposition of an out ruling was accepted.

A couple years ago, I had a proposed change to incorporate this interpretation and it went nowhere except down the drain.

I will try again this year.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by JPRempe

1 - Does R1 count? Yes - scored before the ejection
2 - Does the home run count towards their limit? Yes- OTFHR was hit before the ejection
3 - Does B2 count as a run? Depends - Does the B/R have to touch all four bases in this league, or is the score automatically awarded when he went yard? (local rules will/can govern this answer)
4 - How many outs ya got? I have 2 outs, but again local rules can govern this play based on ejected players.

Sorry I've been silent all day, but I do tech support for a school district with a very hectic schedule from time to time.

To answer JPRempe's question, the league follows ASA very closely and only deviates slightly from the ASA championship rules. There are no local rules regarding home runs, other than the number of allowed OTFHRs.

Regarding the rules, I haven't been able to find anything that specifically covers ejections during a dead ball situation. All I've been able to find have been live ball situations (ie., flagrant collisions with great force). The only parallel I can draw from that situation is that play is in progress, and the player is called out AND ejected. However, it's a reverse logic, as the player was already out, and the ejection is the escalation of the penalty due to its flagrant nature. In my case, the player was ejected first, and then called out.

I hate falling back on the God Rule, but in this case, I believe it was warranted. And given this guy's history in the league, I have no qualms about nailing the guy to the wall for his attitude. Frankly, I would give anything to catch him in the act of using a banned bat, but I doubt that will ever happen. Cheating in co-ed recreational slow pitch softball is an ultimate low for a "sportsman."

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by jimpiano

Dakota's actions were first to stop a fight from happening, which he did successfully by ejecting the batter/runner. I would have done the same thing and made any notes after the players were gone and the situation was diffused.

Just to clarify, it was NCASAUmp's situation and call, not that I necessarily disagreed with it.

The thing I might bring up is the umpire should not (IMO) personally try to break up fights. That doesn't sound like what happened here, tho.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

...Frankly, I would give anything to catch him in the act of using a banned bat, but I doubt that will ever happen. ...

If he is using an altered bat painted to look like a legal bat, look for any evidence it has been repainted. For example, if the paint is chipped anywhere, look for a primer coat underneath. No bat manufacturer uses a primer paint under the finish paint (or so we have been told at our umpire clinics).

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Just to clarify, it was NCASAUmp's situation and call, not that I necessarily disagreed with it.

The thing I might bring up is the umpire should not (IMO) personally try to break up fights. That doesn't sound like what happened here, tho.

I agree, and I normally don't do that. Fortunately, he was still 45 feet away, and his bat was laying at my feet. Just kidding.

I'll bring up the whole bat thing in another post, but I've yet to decide how to phrase my question.

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

I agree, and I normally don't do that. Fortunately, he was still 45 feet away, and his bat was laying at my feet. Just kidding.

I'll bring up the whole bat thing in another post, but I've yet to decide how to phrase my question.

Sorry for the mix up on names on the OP.

I was not talking about physically breaking up a fight, but preventing one and a possible ensuing brawl by moving quickly to eject the player(s), which is what happened in the situation described.