Trigger happy umpire leads to overturned forfeit
 

I never thought I would see this happen. I got a call last week from my assigner, telling me to go easy on my first game scheduled for last night. Confused, I asked why. He simply tells me that it's a resumed game, and that they're a little upset with the umpire from last week. I do my best Bull Shannon impression ("Oooooookay") and show up to the field last night.

So I arrive to the field and ask "so, where are we in the game?" I get the low-down: top of 1st, 2 outs, runner on 1B, 1-1 count on batter. "Game called this early? That's odd..." I asked them why the game had been called. There was no rain Thursday. I get the following response from the captain of the team not at fault:

Batter had been called out for stepping out of the box. Batter did not agree with the call, and referred to it as "pi$$-poor umpiring." Batter gets tossed out of the game. The tossed player leaves the dugout and goes to talk with one of the local rec supervisors on the opposite side of the tower (4 diamonds in a pinwheel configuration with a scoretower at the center). He's completely out of sight, and is not causing any troubles. PU spots him and immediately declares a forfeit. Teams go ballistic. Some players even chase him to the parking lot.

Long story short, the municipality, frustrated with this umpire pulling the usual BS to get out of calling games, decides to overturn the forfeit and resume the game from the point at which it was stopped.

This is the same umpire from this thread. While he was right in the strictest letter of the rule book, he's a prime candidate for OOO of the Year Award.

Fortunately, the team that initially won due to the forfeit ended up winning anyway, and everyone was happy.

Maybe the batter (in the original game) was right all along.

So did this ump get dumped by the assignor?

I seriously hope he does. Unfortunately, a number of umpires in our org (including me) have had a number of injuries or other medical issues, so we're a little shorthanded. He could seriously be a great ump if he would just stop the BS and get his head out of his rear. He showboats. He provides comments on the game. He cops attitude with the players. He tries to overrule umps. He's even left the field in the middle of a game because, according to him, "it's my birthday today. See y'all later."

He's the only ump I refuse to work with in our org.

Perhaps transferred to a psychiatrist. :rolleyes:

Okay, based simply on game situation and ingnoring the extraneous idiocy of this individual umpire and speaking ASA:

Unless the league has specific rules to address an ejection and forfeit contrary to ASA, they lack the authority to ignore the forfeit.

Even though it is obvious the umpire was looking for trouble, he was well within the scope of his authority to forfeit the game. Rule 4.8.B specifically states that an ejected player must leave the grounds. Not may, not should, not suggested, but MUST leave the grounds. It doesn't say "sight and sound" as so many umpires and players are fond of saying. Obviously, this player did not do this.

Rulte 5.4.K specifically states that once a game has been forfeited, it cannot be changed.

Understand that I am not defending this oaf and his unprofessional tactics. However, if the ejected player did not violate the rule, the umpire would not have had cause to forfeit the game. If the team who forfeited has a beef it is with their player.

Meanwhile, if this umpire is that bad, the league's administrative authority can always redline the individual.

If the softball league we service would have vacated the forfeit ,they would have had 2 choices. 1) Game with no umpires or 2) coin flip.

Depending on the umpire's past record,that more than likely would have been his last game to call in our association. The first time you do that sets a precedent. Next you'll be having teams appealing game forfeiture after game forfeiture and the League will have more problems than they ever had and it would be traced back to this event.

I agree that he was well within his right to declare the game a forfeit. The player was clearly still on the premises and did not obey the ejection order immediately. By rule, forfeit.

My problem is that the umpire did not make any attempt to resolve the situation short of the forfeit. He simply saw an opportunity to go home early (it was the last game of the night), and he took it. IMHO, the better way to go about it would be to go to the coach and say, "coach, your guy has gotta go. Please address it." Something like that. If the guy goes up to the complex supervisor to file a complaint and leaves quietly, I have no problem with that. The rule, IMHO, is to provide umpires leverage when a player refuses to leave, which apparently was not the case Thursday night.

My shock came when I found out that the league decided to do the unthinkable: reverse a forfeit. Both teams agreed to it, and the outcome was still the same. On top of that, it's a church league.

*shrug* What can I say?

I think this guy may have a brother working in Seattle...:eek:

That's it, I'm leaving the country! The US is not big enough for two of these nitwits behind the plate (different games, of course)...

It is my understanding that an overturned forfeit means insurance will not cover the game.

I'm not sure how this applies to what is essentially a formal protest of the forfeit.

But if you are on the field and call forfeit and get the ole "oh its for the players, we'll be good" and start the game, you start it without insurance.

I could be wrong, that is what I was told.

I will definitely bring that up with my scheduler.

Wade,
I believe that you are correct when you speak of playing a "practice game" when the real game has been forfeited or ended. I've been told the same sort of thing and it does make sense.
However, I'm very sure you are incorrect in your thought that insurance would not be ineffect when a protest has been upheld and the "forfeited" game is being played.
I'd suggest that you speak with the folks who told you that - and run this situation past them.

I already stated I wasnt sure how that would apply to a protested game. I imagine at that point it would be in the higher ups hands..

Is Hoenigs selling x-ray glasses now? :)

I agree that this might be a case of an OOO but I also think the ball team might be given you a bias version of the events. (The other post you referenced did not seem to be OOO, just wrong rules applied.)

I think the league took a wrong course of action.