WARNING: Biased Opinion Ahead!

[IRISHMAFIA]

Ya know....when I first started working baseball (1966), I became a rules freak. Or at least I thought I was until I started moving around and talking to different umpires working different leagues at different levels. It didn't take long to find out that what I knew about the official rules of baseball was nothing next to what everyone else seemed to be telling me.

Then again, baseball rules run a full circle. Some are so vague you could write an entire new book just to cover all the possible interpretations. Then some get so scenario-specific, you need to figure out what play just occurred before you can find the correct rule to apply.

When I started playing softball, I would take my baseball knowledge and apply them to the game I was playing. It turned into constant frustration as I knew these umpires had no idea what the game was about.

So I did what I now tell other players to do, read the rule book and become an umpire. I started reading the book and it waa like light at the end of the tunnel. My first UIC once told me to stop thinking. He told me to take a play, throw the rule book up against it and see what sticks, then apply that rule.

After a few years of kicking rules, I discovered he was right. I stopped thinking and everything came to me much easier.

Before someone gets upset, I am making no accusation here. My strong suit is ASA. I have found that their rules are not so much vague as they are a "one-size-fits-all" read. Many of us, including myself, tend to read things into the rules that are not there. Why? Because it makes sense. With ASA, a perfect example is when a runner gets two bases from the time of the throw when a thrown ball leaves the field of play or becomes blocked. Well, now you have the throw-back to first on a line drive, trying to double up R1. Okay, I think, the runner was heading back to 1B, that's one, and then to 2B. That's two. "Runner goes to second". As we all know, R1 should be awarded 3B on this play (ASA). I kicked that call twice before an coach argued the point. I wouldn't give that runner an extra inch if my life depended on it. The coach, he was so upset that I had to not-so-politely ask him to leave. I couldn't figure what he was arguing about. My call made sense to me right up until I reread the rule book.

Boy, did I feel like a horse's ***. I apologized to the coach the next time I saw him.

Everything that was offered in the recent obstruction discussions makes absolute sense and would spur little argument from anyone other then an anal rules idiot like myself.

I learn a lot about NFHS, NSA, USSSA, PONY, etc. on these types of boards. I think the banter on this board is quite informative and discussion, even some bickering (which is rare for this board), makes us at least think about it and, in turn, better umpires.

And then someone ruins it all by quoting the case book. JUST KIDDING!

Now, anybody want to discuss interference on an infield fly with the tying run on third in the bottom of the 12th inning?

[kchamp]

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
[ As we all know, R1 should be awarded 3B on this play (ASA).

[/B]

No way! 3rd? Damn now I gotta read the rule book. b

Kent

[whiskers_ump]

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA

Everything that was offered in the recent obstruction discussions makes
absolute sense and would spur little argument from anyone other then an anal
rules idiot like myself.

And then someone ruins it all by quoting the case book. JUST KIDDING!

Mike,
I agree, I thought I had an excellent solution to the play
and at one point even had the coach convienced, until one
individual did [and as I stated earlier] some good research,
and then I felt like the person you described in para. 7 of
your post.

Kent,

I see you found the smiles.

glen

[Dakota]

Hmmmm... where to begin...

How about this?

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
And then someone ruins it all by quoting the case book.

Errr, umm, that would be me, right?

Then again, baseball rules run a full circle. Some are so vague you could write an entire new book just to cover all the possible interpretations. Then some get so scenario-specific, you need to figure out what play just occurred before you can find the correct rule to apply.

My strong suit is ASA. I have found that their rules are not so much vague as they are a "one-size-fits-all" read.

OBR is kinda the holy writ of rules. It was written back in ancient times, and has been translated and re-translated. Your only hope of understanding it is to study volumes of commentaries with references back to the remaining fragments of original intent manuscripts.

Or, another way of looking at it is the ASA rule book is to OBR as the Betty Crocker Cookbook is to IRS instructions.

Many of us, including myself, tend to read things into the rules that are not there. Why? Because it makes sense.

My first reaction to the scenario on obstruction was to rule to runner out, since the try for 2B and getting tagged out seemed to have nothing to do with the obstruction. However...

Everything that was offered in the recent obstruction discussions makes absolute sense and would spur little argument from anyone other then an anal rules idiot like myself.

I afraid I'm in that category (rules idiot) with you, Mike. So, I started looking for what exceptions were listed for the "can't call the runner out between the bases where the obstruction occured" rule. Was this a rule or a guideline? It turns out it was a rule, and a hard and fast one at that.

One thing I enjoy about these boards is the excuse it gives me to research the rules. I figure it is a fun way to actually read and re-read the rule book.

If the scenario on obstruction had happened to me in a game before this discussion, I would have allowed the out at 2B to stand.

[whiskers_ump]

Originally posted by Dakota
Hmmmm... where to begin...

How about this?

Errr, umm, that would be me, right?

Dakota,

Were your ears burning? That was still a good job of research.
I do think most officials [espeically the ones
that have been posting on this board] could have sold the
out, however, if they had remembered all the rules and
situations that they had crammed in their brain over the
years, in that split second on that field, they would have
applied the correct award/penalty. Again, I and I am sure
others, learned something on this round.

glen

[Roger Greene]

12th inning? I'm still back in the 3rd inning rereading obstruction material!!!!

I too, think the value of these boards are that they allow us to learn from each other and make mistakes here instead of on the field.

And with you guys, unlkke some of the folks on the baseball boards, a disagreement doesn't turn personal or nasty. We can argue and still remain respectful and friends(I hope.) At least as close to friends as people can become in this "virtual" world.

Roger Greene

[SamNVa]

All opinions are necessarily biased.

[Steve M]

Mike,
I tend to agree - I started in baseball too. 'Course that was well after you (in 68) and then got into doing softball while I was playing it - I thought it might help my playing to know where I could "take advantage" of a situation, and it did a number of times. I didn't get too concerned about the rules until my knees forced me to quit playing 14 yrs ago, nor was I all that concerned about mechanics. That's all changed a bit. Nothing motivates quite like embarrassing yourself on the field.

I'm now working under several different sanctioning bodies' rules and have based everything on knowing ASA's rules and then studying the differences.

Like Roger, I notice the nastiness elsewhere, it seems to avoid all of the softball boards, thankfully. Is our timing that much better that we look for what's really there instead of giving an immediate reaction? My old martial arts teachers would be pleased............

Now, as for that interference on a infield fly in the bottom of the 12th, with the tying run on 3B..... hmmmmmm
Batter is out when IF declared, and the runner who interferes is also out, dead ball, and nobody scores. So, we're either on the way to the cars or we've got 2 outs & 2 runners on somewhere - depends on who ran into the fielder.

Ya know, it's kinda cool seeing some folks turn into rules junkies after being on the boards for a while.

I forgot to mention this, so I'm adding it now. The problem I notice now is that whenever I do have a brain fart on the field, somebody is watching closely.

[Edited by Steve M on Feb 7th, 2002 at 02:58 PM]

[oppool]

I have in a little over a year in this forum and others have learn so much from all of you that cant be learn I dont care how many times you read the rule book or attend classes and fully appreciate it. Just in our recent discussions with obstruction I feel a much better comprehesion of the rule and things that I did not think of before no matter how many times I have read the book.

Now for you guys that call under multiple league I have great respect for you how you can remember in a instant of time which rules apply to which league is beyond me. Myself I will stick to doing as much ASA as possible and maybe some time down the road try to do some FED.

I think one thing that we might of learn is to not let our Sense of Fair Play get in the way of properly applying the rules as they are written. Which is our job!! I have always said that we are like lawyers and the better our knowledge the more we can get away with and the better we look.


Just a few thoughts and Thanks to everybody who particapates


Don

[Edited by oppool on Feb 7th, 2002 at 03:37 PM]

[kchamp]

Originally posted by oppool

I think one thing that we might of learn is to not let our Sense of Fair Play get in the way of properly applying the rules as they are written. Which is our job!!


Don

[Edited by oppool on Feb 7th, 2002 at 03:37 PM]

I'll have to admit, you just described me. But I would think the intent of any rule initially written was to get "fair play." Yet if we don't apply the rule to the letter, then we would loose any protest. (Ah the protest. the only power a coach has over an ump).

Kent

[oppool]

Just remember even though we may sometime disagree how a rule applies and it may not seem fair if we apply the rule to both team the same then everything is as fair as it is going to be. Just like alot of things in life do not seem fair but applied the same to all then we all got to live by it.


JMO

Don

[Dakota]

"Fair" is a subjective concept. When we accept a game assignment, we agree to call the game impartially according to the rules of the organization.

The rules committee (or whatever) has to struggle with the idea of what is fair. We only have to struggle to cram the rules into our heads and to have them available for instant recall.

[Gulf Coast Blue]

Damn........some of you guys are old..........

I did not start Baseball until 1979........

I have seriously considered calling some again.........but ASA ball keeps me plenty busy........we started rules clinics this week.

HS scrimmages started yesterday........our FED assignor has asked me once again to call........told him that my Tuesday and Fridays were busy watching my daughter play HS ball.......not calling someone elses daughter.........grin

Lauren has not joined the SB team yet (she made it after a 1 afternoon tryout) because the Varsity basketball coach moved her up from JV to play with the V during the playoffs....(first time the girls team made the playoffs since 1997).....



Joel

[kchamp]

Originally posted by Gulf Coast Blue
........told him that my Tuesday and Fridays were busy watching my daughter play HS ball.......not calling someone elses daughter.........grin




Joel

Joel,
Your in for some fond memories (and a serious depression when its all over). I took 3 years off from calling HS softball while she (Erin) was playing varsity. During those years I became the Scorekeeper/Announcer. It kept me from being a loudmouth parent that yells at the stupid ump.

Kent

[Steve M]

Originally posted by Gulf Coast Blue
Damn........some of you guys are old..........

I did not start Baseball until 1979........

Joel

Not that old, Joel. I started when I was 14.