You make the call

[NCASAUmp]

Well, here's what I had ruled on the field, and why. Let me know what you guys think.

The background on the batter is that he's known for getting/using doctored bats and using them in any level of play (including co-ed recreational). The runner on third counts (of course). As the batter rounded third, the pitcher had said, "you couldn't hit that ball 200 feet without that illegal bat of yours." His response was (as he clearly started towards the mound), "I'll hit that ball 200 feet up your @$$, and take your fat boy (referring to the right-center fielder) with it, too!" I ejected the batter, as I felt that if I did not immediately act to "break things up," a fight would have definitely and inarguably ensued. Being that he was ejected while on the bases, he became the third out. I did not let him score as a runner, as I have trouble letting someone score who just did a gross USC resulting in his ejection. What was I to do? Let them fight it out, then let him touch home plate? Since the rules make no stipulation on whether or not all bases are touched, the home-run counts towards the team's limit.

His team ended up crushing the other team anyway, so whether or not he counts as a run or as an out had no effect on the game. I feel pretty confident in my call, but I sometimes wonder what others would rule if they were in that situation.

Thoughts?

[Ed Maeder]

Did you check the bat?

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by Ed Maeder

Did you check the bat?

We've been checking his bats over and over. Our state UIC has even looked at them.

They're good. And by "good," I mean indistinguishable from actual Freak 98s (which is what he's supposedly using).

[bkbjones]

Originally Posted by Ed Maeder

Did you check the bat?

Hey Ed,
The head bat checker, your region 15 UIC, should be in your neighborhood by now (yes, I know, Alaska is a damned big neighborhood). Ask WBS if there is an easy way to check a Freak. That's a Miken Freak...not me.

Jan. 1, 2008 can't get here fast enough...no more Freaks in ASA play after that.

I wish I could have gone to that NUS. Heck, a year ago I had already begun making plans. In fact, I think I told you in Portland I would see you in April. My how things change...

And...I would have one run, an out, and yes the HR counts toward their limit. And if they don't like it, this fat boy would stick it 200 feet up their @$$,

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

Well, here's what I had ruled on the field, and why. Let me know what you guys think.
I did not let him score as a runner, as I have trouble letting someone score who just did a gross USC resulting in his ejection.

Can you (or piano, who agreed with this ruling) provide rule support for calling him out?

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

Can you (or piano, who agreed with this ruling) provide rule support for calling him out?

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.

[wadeintothem]

An immediate ejection is not the best way to "break up a fight". Thats like saying throwing lots of gas on a fire is the best way to put out a fire. I keep a little note pad in my line up card holder.. pull out your note pad (or something to write on) and start taking notes.

Sort it out, eject, whatever, and decide after it all goes down.

[jimpiano]

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.

Obviously I agree with the way you handled the play.

Case book 2005/06 refers to a batter who threw his bat in anger, only to have the ball wind up over the fence. Umpire rules dead ball, out for flagrant misconduct and ejected...all runners put back.

In your case the flagrant misconduct took place after the run scored.

I would also defer to your judgement on the best way to prevent mayhem since you knew the players.

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

[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.

[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.

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

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.

Many leagues, including all the ones in my area, have further defined unsportsmanslike conduct to include any profanity loud enough to be heard by spectators...The automatic penalty is an out on the next batter in the teams' lineup and is, if necessary, carried over to the next inning.. Ejection is dependent on the actual language and is usually invoked when the language can be construed as threatening.

[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.

[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.