Silly NCAA runner assistance rule...
 

... and worse umpire application of the rule
... and a true RAT for a coach

Teammates’ handslap to home run hitter erases victory

Sadly, there are plenty of people playing games under ASA rules that believe this ruling would be correct.

Even worse... I know ASA umpires who would make this call. :mad:

So I guess this happened again after a warning - hence the out.... or was a horrible and wrong application of the rule.

Well, the article says that the rule was misapplied, so I'm assuming that this was the first incident.

Because the media is never wrong. :rolleyes:

Another completely useless, BS rule from the NCAA

Here is another story about it and an explanation of the ruling. Since it was a walk-off homerun, the umpires decided that an out was called for. Must have used the God rule. I assume it exists in NCAA. Now I will have to go look for it.

Postbulletin.com: Rochester, MN

The rule is the rule. Not a hard rule to understand or enforce. Let's not debate the rule, let's talk about the process:

(If the article is correct) The coach said there should be a call. The umpire froze, didn't make a ruling. Then he runs off the field to ask, then got the incorrect ruling.

I don't blame the coach for asking, that's her right. The umpire didn't know the rule, but he has to rule something and then give the coaches an opportunity to protest.

The travesty is not having the (insert your favorite phrase) to make a ruling, right or wrong, there are procedures in place to fix it (in this case).

(Again, if the article is correct) What about the other umpire NOT looking in the rule book for the correct ruling? Or the other coach protesting?

And yes, it is acceptable to have a rule book on the field.

BTW, I've given two warnings this year, both in DI games.

I'm surprised that this even took place - every umpire should know whether a touch is allowed or not. However, since this was junior college, I can't speak to the quality of the umpiring (not my arena), so I just won't.

However, I've never believed that having a rule book on the field is smart. Yes, you can fix certain situations, but that just opens you up to tons of trouble. The closest my rule book comes to the field is in my car in the parking lot.

If the umpire wasn't 100% on the rule interpretation, s/he should have made his/her ruling, then immediately offer up to the OC the opportunity to protest. Sounds like these girls may have gotten hosed.

The book is full of em! :cool:

Allow me to clarify, if there is a protest, use the rule book. This is encouraged by the SUIP (the situation of unreported subs and batting out of order were the examples a few years ago). The players were hosed not by rule, but because of umpires who would not follow procedure.

If you've got umpires not following procedure, then you've got an entirely different issue altogether. Having a rule book nearby isn't going to help anything other than to delegitimize an umpire's authority.

Where the hell is the fun in that? ;)

I just made the comment of the rule that is obviously the result of a coach-friendly rule set.

they play NJCAA...
Didn't read where (in either article) the umpire "froze" other than this "statement" came from the umpire NOT issuing the warning right then. (kinda seems like he didnt know the rule based on him stating that he had issued the ruling earlier in the season...if bob cross was the umpire on the field at the time... article doesn't say.)
One article says the crew came together and conferred... the other says a umpire left the field to talk to a superior (and came back with that ruling??? not much of a superior!!)
What a cluster.. if you believe anything you read.

But I gotta ask.... if the ruling was 100% wrong.. were was the protest? how was the other school able to proceed up the playoff ladder?
WTH is going on? is the world ending? OMG!! we all gonna die!!

No biggie... just having fun ;)

I seem to remember parts of a discussion on a situation like this - more than one teammate slapping hands with a homerun hitter before home was touched. I do not believe that there was a consensus reached as to whether all touches on a hit were to be considered the first - and a warning issued. Or if each touch was treated separately.

Wide Slick - I mean Big Slick is right - the rule is the rule and it gets enforced. I did not have any warnings this year, but I was watching. It's not a rule I particularly like or agree with, but that's not relevant - it is the rule. My inclination is that I'd have had a warning to issue - as it all happened on a single play. But, if you see multiple infractions on a single play, do you have one penalty enforced or potentially multiple penalties enforced?

I think the key would be wheter or not you issued your warning. They are entitled to that. If they continue after the warning, it is on them.