You make the call
 

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.

I have no idea since I don't do slow pitch but I'll take a stab at it:

1 - Does R1 count? YES
2 - Does the home run count towards their limit? YES
3 - Does B2 count as a run? YES, UNLESS THE OTHER TEAM APPEALS THAT HE NEVER TOUCHED HOME LATE
4 - How many outs ya got? 2, UNLESS THEY MAKE THE APPEAL IN #3 AND GET THE 3RD OUT THAT WAY

am I close?

You're close, but not quite. :)

Let me clarify one thing (and then clean it up in my OP). He had just rounded 3rd and was about 45 feet away from home.

Not sure how this makes a difference - he's not abandoned his attempt at home (yet), and even ejected he should be allowed to finish his award.

I would rule the batter out since he never touched home plate.
That would be the third out but the run counts.
The home run counts towards the limit.

Speaking ASA, yes as the rules read. There has been an interpretation the past few years that would rule out a runner who committed an unsportsmanlike act while runner the bases.

However, that individual is no longer in the umpiring ranks and referencing his interpretations may irritate some present members of the NUS.

Of course, if you are lucky, another member of the offense will come out and try to pull his teammate away from the pitcher and that, my friend, is an out for runner assistance. :D

BTW, this is the same whether FP or SP save the HR limit.

On an ASA test a few years ago, there was a question that went something like this:

No outs, Abel on 3B, Baker hits a fly ball to deep left. Thinking the ball will be caught, Baker throws his bat in anger. The ball goes over the fence.

Ruling: Baker is out for USC and Abel is returned to 3B.

The question didn't say so specifically, but it seemed to indicate that Abel had not crossed the plate before the USC (the thrown bat came directly after the ball was hit).

(I guess that would count against the team's HR limit, too.)

Naturally, the ruling on this question generated a pile of "what ifs" and inferences. One inference was that if a runner deliberately crashed F2 before touching home plate, even if F2 did not have the ball, the runner would be not only ejected, but also called out for USC, with no run scoring.

Perhaps this, like many test questions, made its way to the casebook. When I get a chance, I'll look for it.

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?

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).

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 @$$,:eek:

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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? :rolleyes:

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.

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.

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.

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.

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."

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.

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).

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.

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.

We have a similar rule for ASA leagues / teams in MN, called the casual profanity rule. It works well for JO play. I have no idea how well it works for AA slowpitch.

The league in which this game took place also has a strict "no cursing" rule. My "rule of thumb" on it is if I can clearly hear it from more than 25 feet away (or if the scorekeepers behind the backstop can hear it), it was too loud. If a player keeps it under their breath, I don't care - let them blow off a little steam after blowing a play, right? No one's really hurt by it.

This player, on the other hand, was yelling it as loudly as he could, directing it at a player, and getting ready to fight. See ya. :cool:

Wait until Mike sees this one ... we're going to spin off into a separate topic now.

I'll just leave this one alone, only reminding of the phrase regarding who local rules are made by. This one is among the top of that list.

Our local rules are made by the Division of Recreation with the input of players,coaches, and umpires. But at the end of the day the parks belong to the taxpayers and the Division is responsible for making the experience in the park safe and enjoyable for all, not just softball players.

Actually, if I remember Mike's comments correctly, they were that there should be no such thing as an ASA profantiy rule, since among other things, it is impossible to define "profanity" in an other than local context. Even regional doesn't always work.

In a strictly local context, however, it can work.

And even then you have umpires going long for a "gotcha".

Even locally, you will have multple opinions and level of enforcement based on one's rearing, religious background, religious background of those around you, embarassment, knowledge of particular players, etc.

Richmond use to have a profanity rule during their big Memorial Day tournament. Any cursing either added an out to your team or gave your opponent an extra out while batting.

One of my teammates hit a drive up the middle. The pitcher (team from NYC) went up for the ball and muttered, "Oh, Christ!". Before the pitcher's feet hit the ground, the umpire (young female) already gave my team a fourth out for that half inning.

Even though our team benefited from the award, I had no problem telling that umpire she was dead wrong and requested she keeps her religious beliefs in check during the remainder of the game. She was tiffed, but since I didn't curse (or, at least, what she considered cursing), there was nothing for her to do.

Since someone is waiting on this one, I am not the language police. Do not bring your family to a competitive adult game in which you KNOW before hand that profanity may be involved and expect the umpire to play the part of your mother. Do not expect others to completely change their ways to accommodate those not participating.

Will I ask a player to keep the volume down? Yep. Will I remind them that others are in the area and may not appreciate his actions? At times.

Will I start threatening players and coaches with outs, ejections and reports for what some may consider questionable language the is not directed at an umpire or another participant in the game. Nope!

But, they can do that with LBR and other things, too.

That is not "strictly" local. Having a large regional tournament does make a profanity rule unfair. And, without a generally understood local meaning of "profanity" it can become Carlin-esque in its absurdity.

Our leagues all have specific rules defining unsportsmanlike conduct and the use of profanity. They are points of emphasis in all managers and umpires meetings and the league demands that the penalties for violation of the rules be enforced.

The late Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart, in writing an opinion in an obscenity case, said " I cannot define obscenity, but I know it when I see it."

Well, it does not take much to recognize abusive, lewd, and profane speech, either. And the burden is not on the users of the park to stay away, it is on the players to refrain from using the language.

The result of these rules has been terriffic. The penalties, which start with outs and, for repeat offenders, run to removal from a team roster, have made the blue language almost non-existent, even in the testosterone laden Men's Open Leagues.

I am not arguing for ASA rules on these matters, since the Leagues can set their own local standards quite well.

And, as an umpire, the league rules are just as important as the ASA Rules, perhaps even more important, since the League is writing my pay check.

The bottom line here is that softball players are tenants in a community park and must abide by the landlord's rules. Players who cannot speak in a civil tongue and umpires who won't enforce the rules will have to go elsewhere.

I'm usually pretty reasonable about the "no profanity" rule. I'm not a religious person at all, but I live in a very religious area. As such, I do try to find a balance between the community expectations and what is reasonable to allow as an umpire. However, one thing that was made very clear once I moved to the area and started calling SB here was that these are considered "community parks," a place where families should be able to bring their young kids without having to cover their ears or say "earmuffs" when a batter pops up.

Frankly, I'm all for some highly competitive ball and great athleticism. When I used to play, I was VERY competitive. However, regardless of what rules were in place, I always found a way to keep from being vulgar, however you might define it. Let out a growl, slap your hand, and move on. Besides, it's rec ball, right? Why do players *need* to cuss during rec ball? If you pop up, shrug it off, and do better next time.

Tourneys are different, and if I call any, I will let a bit more slide. I just calmly say, "hey... keep it clean, player." 99% of the time, they acknowledge it was wrong, apologize, and keep from doing it again. No big deal to me, and no big deal for them.

The point is what may be profanity to you, may not be profanity to the person standing next to you.

What is outrageous in your mind, may be standard, everyday vocabulary. Like it or not, this country is still full of purists who place a value on words. I place no value on words. Words are nothing more than a method of communication.

Somewhere along the way, the self-proclaimed morally-superior individuals needed to sell people on damnation and part of that is the fear of what they proclaim to be the beliefs of a Supreme Being. Of course, these are the same people that relate financial donations to salvation. For some reason, a group of words, a specific order of letters, were deemed "obscene". The entire thought of this scam being perpetrated upon those who apparently are not to smart (which is a fair amount of people in this country) is obscene in itself.

BTW, if you honestly believe in the injection of one's moral beliefs into the game of softball, stay away from the teams from The Bahamas or Jamaica just to mention two. Their idea of profanity, if there is one, will demoralize you in a heartbeat.:eek:

You now know why my name was mentioned when this hit thread hit the board. :D

You mean like "ho"? :eek:

Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA
And even then you have umpires going long for a "gotcha".

Not on my watch!

None of the rules I mentioned were based on anyone's "moral beliefs" or religion.

They were adopted with input and suggestions by League officials, players and umpires and are concerned with good manners and respect for others, not on who anyone prays or does not pray to.

These are secular rules.

And, they are rules just the same as rules defining what constitutes interference, the dimensions of the batter's box, or the strike zone.

Any umpire who has a problem with enforcing the rules of the league and the game will have a problem getting assignments here.

Jim, does your league publish a list of banned words, or is it left to umpire judgment to define "profanity"?

If it is left to umpire judgment, you may find an umpire or two who would consider saying "Christ" as cursing based on their religious sensibilities. That was Mike's point.

And, as the Don Imus ruckus points out, feigned offense can also be an issue.

We have league commissioners and umpire supervisors who monitor all games in the parks. The sportsmanship and profanity rules are a point of emphasis with managers, players and umpires. Words do not have to be profane to be abusing or threatening,,,while a muttered,self-directed, oath audible only on the diamond does not warrant any action.

These rules cause no concern to anyone and are followed without complaint.
Since the "profanity out", if it is invoked, is imposed on the offending team's NEXT batter, peer pressure alone makes the actual calls extremely rare.

Regarding the Imus affair, I have no idea what "feigned offense" means.

feigned
adj.
1 imagined
2 pretended; simulated; sham

Who feigned offense?

The remarks were directed at a group of basketball players who were offended.
What did the basketball players do to warrant being called nappy headed ho's?
They did not "feign" offense. They were truly offended.
They also accepted Imus's apology.

I was talking about all of the other "community leaders". I doubt any one of THEM was offended by the words, only by the idea of who said them.

Here is an exercise for you: do a comparison of all of the things the self-proclaimed "community leaders" have said about other groups with what Imus said and then convince yourself that these "community leaders" were actually offended by anything. They just saw an opportunity.

Imus made a career, in part, using insulting language against public figures.

This practice is not without risk.

The fact that he was very successful and had a large following allowed many public figures to wink at his excesses.

But when he used his forum to degrade those not involved in public discourse he was left with no defense and no defenders.

Did this warrant firing him?

That was up to his bosses at CBS.

This is probably not the right forum to discuss this, but if you want to continue feel free to e-mail me at [email protected]

So why is it that no one here uses profanity without substituting characters? Apparently, we all know where the line is drawn, and so do the players. ;)

Okay, that comment was only 10% serious. If it's a simple d@mn it, I definitely let it go. When they drop a very loud "f-bomb," I have a hard time just letting it slide, especially at the league I previously mentioned. It's not that I have sensitive ears. You should hear me at work when someone breaks their computer. "I have to go unf*** So-and-So's computer." However, if I don't enforce the rule in that league, I won't be asked to call there again.

*shrug* Not my rule. I just enforce it.

Please read what I write carefully. I was not defending Imus. I don't like Imus. I don't listen to his program. (As an aside, there's a novel concept - if a person is offended by Imus, turn off the radio! Wow! Who'd a thought of that!)

I was mocking the self-proclaimed "community leaders" for their obvious hypocrisy and self-serving pretence at being offended by the very thing they engage in themselves.

Especially in the "hip hop" community. ;)

Because the program that supports this board won't let me use creative language. Here, allow me to demonstrate.

I think that censorship is complete and utter bull****, and I really don't want any son of a ***** controlling what I can and cannot say.

In the previous post I actually typed the words that have the asterixs, er, asteri, um asterixes. Well...you know, those little star thingies!

You mean prople like Al Sharpton, Howard Stern, Jesse Jackson, any stand-up comic regardless of race, gender or sexual preference, George Wallace, (enter rapper's name/designation here), etc.?

Imus is an ***, but in this country, that is NOT against the law. He can be stupid, but if that was illegal, all the politicians would be looking for green cards. (f.y.i., that's a knock on politicians, not legal immigrants).

Nonetheless, the over reaction to the stupidity and poor attempt at humor is resolved in one, single motion of changing the station. Hell, it was five days and a YouTube tour before it even hit the light of day.

The FEIGNED offense taken was not only trivial and a sign of immaturity, but contrary to the beliefs upon which this country was born.

Anybody got a flat to wave?

I think he was looking for one that's more of a white flag.

Personally, I prefer the Gadsden Flag. Love it. Google it. :)

Nothing Imus said or did was illegal or violated any law.
He is still free to say and do as he pleases.
CBS honchos just said he would not be using their microphones to do so.

The Bill of Rights restricts the government from interfering with your free speech rights. It offers no protection from anyone's boss who finds an employee's speech offensive.

Trust me, those snakes didn't find anything he said offensive. If they had, it wouldn't have taken Al Sharpton to initiate punitive action.

The cowards just drew the politically correct card from the deck. But that's okay, because I will now make an effort to avoid sponsor who advertise on CBS radio.

I am still struggling to understand any point you are trying to make.

Really? I doubt that. I think you are just trying to appear obtuse. It is easier than writing an actual response.

A response to what?

Drifting back into trollism, I see. I'm more than happy to debate the political issues here, but not with a troll.

:p Only if there's something nappy? :rolleyes: Didn't somebody just say something along those lines?

Just what is it you want to debate?

You know what, jim, when you get into your troll mode, there is no point continuing. Maybe you just have this juvenile idea that he who posts last, regardless of how insipid the post, wins. Have fun with that.

Okay, guys... Consider this thread closed. We're waaaaaay off-topic. :)

Move along, people. Nothing to see here! ;)

I am still waiting for you to contribute anything.

See... this is part of the problem. YOU "definitely let go" a simple d@mmit. Someone else may not. Any profanity rule, unless it's VERY detailed, down to the words which are outlawed, and which languages they are outlawed in, is inherently going to be called differently from umpire to umpire.

I was ejected in just such a league for saying, conversationally with my pitcher ("Stop throwing that crap" when he was trying some spinball he couldn't get over), the word CRAP. Ejected. Not two days later, an opposing batter was not even talked to when he yelled the F-Bomb after he hit a popup. Why? Because THAT umpire felt that he was yelling at himself and his utterance didn't meet his definition of profanity.

That inequity is what makes 99.99% of the profanity rules out there bad rules.

Besides ... we are there to call the game. Words are just words - and have nothing to do with safe/out, ball/strike, interference/obstruction. You want language police out there? Define the rules IN SPECIFIC, or it will not be called uniformly.

Hey, mcrowder...
 

You'd better pay attention, here. Look at the message just above...

I think Irish has figured out your login / password for this board. ;)

LOL! On this particular topic, we agree 100% - which is why I couldn't wait for him to see the post that kicked us in this direction.

Another example of "Local Rules are Made By Fools."

Local rules here are made after input from the league commissioners, the players, the managers and the umpires.

Rules governing abusive language are to be enforced.

The fact that penalties are seldom, if ever, used speaks to the ability of all conerned to behave in a civil manner in a public park.

If those rules have been adopted by foolls, then the world might want to listen to the fools on a more regular basis.

And I agree with you there about "rules by fools." For me, it's not so much what they say, but what's behind it. Are they getting out of control? Are they intentionally speaking "aggressively" towards the situation, or towards another player? It's all context. All in all, I rarely toss a player for profanity, unless it's *clearly* apparent that they're not in control of themselves.

During a playoff game, I was about to give a player a simple warning for dropping the "f-bomb." It wasn't shouted, it wasn't even 100% clear to anyone else who wasn't paying attention (he smacked his glove as he said it), and it was while he wasn't part of the play (so focus was on the other players). After the play was over, I started moving a little closer to him to tell him quietly, "hey... keep it clean, man," but he beat me to it and dropped another that was as clear as day. At that point, hey, I couldn't just let it go, even though it was directed at no one else but himself. The rules are rules, no matter how much I agree or disagree with them. If I don't call them, I don't get asked to call there again.

The rules are rules, no matter how much I agree or disagree with them. If I don't call them, I don't get asked to call there again.

At the end of the day that is the only observation that cant be disputed.

If the shoe fits...

(Note - I'm not ridiculing ANY umpire for upholding the rules he's given. Leagues I've worked have had some pretty ridiculous ones - but I uphold them at best as possible.

I'm just saying... 99% of the time, a rule invented by a league that circumvents, supplements, or contradicts the regular rulebook (which is FINE for everyone else) is almost always filled with problems. And the profanity rule, unless spelled out completely (and it never is) is one of those.)

Look, I get the culture conflict problem. But locally, here at least, it is not a problem. Just another rule requiring umpire judgment. I'm not arguing for or against these rules; I'm only arguing you guys are making a mountain out of a mole hill.

Leaving out the big apple team playing in the Bible belt, and similar clashes of acceptable / street language, what this boils down to is neither you nor Mike trust umpire judgment in application of these rules in a local setting. OK, but dollars to donuts, there are just as many, if not more, umpires with faulty judgment regarding interference and obstruction which have a much greater impact on games day in and day out.

*pulls out a $1 bill* I'll buy it. :)

I'm only arguing you guys are making a mountain out of a mole hill.

Maybe the most cogent comment of the entire thread.

Well, the whole point of this thread was about the penalties that I ruled, not the profanity issue. I tossed the guy for inciting a fight, only exampled by his statement to the opposing team's pitcher. Y'all went down this road yourselves. ;)

And, enjoyed every minute of it! :D

I'm just saying... 99% of the time, a rule invented by a league that circumvents, supplements, or contradicts the regular rulebook (which is FINE for everyone else) is almost always filled with problems. And the profanity rule, unless spelled out completely (and it never is) is one of those.)


Since the rulebook is silent on matters of local interest then the rules have to be supplemented.

3 balls a walk, two strikes you are out...free susbstitution, and penalties for profane and abusive language are but a few addressed by local rules.

Our umpires have no problem with enforcing the league specific rules and the fact that penalties for profane and abusive language are rare speaks well for those who codified them.

I am surprised that someone who claims to be as good an umpire as you do has trouble understanding this.

Well, what I think they were referring to was the fact that judging a person's language is highly subjective. It's easy to be consistent with a 1-and-1 count or accepting courtesy runners for injured players, but judging what's a potty mouth and what is acceptable is completely up to each and every umpire. I've had one player get ejected by another umpire for shouting "d@mn it" when popping up, whereas I might let it slide (though not without a friendly "warning," if one can call it that). New Yorkers may let "SOB" go, whereas those in NC may not. And if the two cultures mix (as is commonly the case in the Triangle area of NC), what then?

*shrugs* Unless leagues spell it out word for word, it's completely up to how an umpire's feeling that day.

There you go! Now, let's take this one step farther down the base line.

Whether it is the strike zone, the height of a pitch, the judging of illegal, the timing on an LBR ruling, etc., what is the one thing we always tell the umpire to be?

Anyone?

Why ... the rules work perfectly well on their own. Also, teams who progress to tournament find themselves at a disadvantage as they've excelled in a league that has different rules (depending on what the local rule in question is...)

The first two are normally unobtrusive, although "free substitution" is often not spelled out well enough in Local Rules, and can cause problems. My main problem with language rules is MOST of the time, the rules just say "Profane language will not be tolerated," leaving this immense grey area for interpretation, which actually leads to huge differences in umpire consistency. Any rule that leads to vast umpire inconsistency is a poor rule.

I don't have a problem enforcing such a rule when I'm asked to - but I'm CERTAIN that my enforcement differs from the enforcement by other umpires - and this is a bad thing. I fail to understand why one would not understand that this is a bad thing.

Where did I say I didn't understand anything? What I'm saying is that MOST profanity rules are not spelled out well and are not specific --- and this leads to huge inconsistency. Inconsistency is a bad thing. (Remember my anecdote - getting ejected for saying "crap" to my own player, and later having an opponent not get tossed for a loud F-bomb... inconsistency). Inconsistent treatment of a rule leads to inequity, which eventually leads to unfair balance among teams.

Oh! I know, I know! Can I guess it?!?! Pick me, pick me!

Umm...cons......uh....cons......errr....constipate d!!!! :D

Quick to ring 'em up? ;)

Okay, Ferris got it right. Be consistent. Even the players and coaches will tell you they can deal with a bad umpire as long as they are consistent.

So, why would anyone want to support a rule, which I can state with confidence, that cannot possibly be applied consistently?

Want to? I think the matter is more like "have to." There are a number of rules that I think are silly, but they're still in the books, so I have to enforce them.

But I hear where you and mcrowder are coming from. If a rule can't be applied evenly, it makes our jobs much tougher.

Well, not always. A local CYO which has a "must slide" rules and only uses umpires for their playoffs.

I have counseled some umpires who asked about it to NEVER make such a statement to anyone stating that you will enforce such a rule.

It was explained to the person who runs the league of the liability of such a rule and how it places the umpires in the middle. They understood and had no problem.

One year (the only year I worked this tournament) a coach who was also a SP player challenged me on my failure to make such a ruling.

The girl was running to 2B and was forced out. The SS threw over the still-in-the-basepath runner and, of course, all the kids started screaming that she has to slide.

I told the coach of there was no interference and that he will never hear me tell any player that they must slide. I told him I would explain after the game if he liked, but my ruling was going to stand. Afterwards, I told him why I made that statement and you could see a light bulb go on over his head.

There's a difference between ENFORCING rules and supporting them. Mike and I are saying that not only should WE not support such rules ... but coaches and players should be the first to not support such a rule. In fact - if the coaches and players didn't want such a local rule, it would probably not be there in the first place.

But certainly - if the rule is there, I believe all of us would enforce it as best we could.

My favorite local rule blow up:

Rules stated that teams would use CBO and free substitution at all positions other than pitcher. I informed the league beforehand of the potential issues, and was ignored.

Late in the season, the president of the league is coaching one of the teams. His big power-hitting but slow-as-molasses catcher gets a double and is the potential winning run late in a game. Without even coming out of the dugout, he sends Speedy McWheels out there to be the Courtesy Runner.

Me: Sorry coach - no can do.

Coach/Pres: But the rules say I can send in a runner for my catcher.

Me: Yes, you can - but it has to be someone not in the lineup.

Coach/Pres: That's not what I intended when I put the rule in.

Me: Sorry ... the rule as written does not mention anything about allowing players IN the lineup to be used as CR's.

Coach/Pres: But we didn't mean to eliminate CR's when we wrote that - we just wanted everyone to bat.

Me: Sorry. Get the catcher back out there and lets play.

He eventually got himself tossed. And slowpoke didn't score on the next girl's hit, which was, of course, followed by the 3rd out. They lost in extra innings.

Just another example of a local rule not thought out correctly (and a little worse, since this EXACT situation is one of the ones I pointed out when I mentioned that the local rule didn't cover everything it needed to cover.)

Because they are.

I guess our umpires are just better.

You're funny.

Said with a double fist bang banging and a twirl in the jimpiano tutu:rolleyes:

Did anyone hear something around here? I sort of sounded like a bray.

So, you are suggesting that the amount of variability in the strike zone between umpires is an acceptable level of variability in the application of a profanity rule? :eek:

Hey, I guess then we have no issue to discuss at all, do we? :cool:

Who is trolling now? ;)