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.

Rots of Ruck....it's not there!:D

Pffft... that's the home town paper of the hero coach.

From the other end of the state (you may need to register to read the article):

Brainerd Dispatch

If she had slid they couldn't do high fives...:D

Such a funny, funny, man. Just remember, in the wilderness, no one can hear you scream (Steve and I will be together this weekend, and we are staying in a bed and breakfast far away from civilization).

Steve, we discussed a similar scenario earlier this year in which a runner and the batter were touched on the same homerun (not multiple touches of the batter). By rule, would this mean the warning is issued for the runner, and the out applied to the batter? The consensus between our group is exactly what Wade stated the timing of the warning.

There must be a rule book on site, either your's or their's per NCAA rule.

Won't let me read without registering. Want to post the gist of it?

On site can be in your car in the parking lot. They just want one that you can access in a reasonable amount of time.

If I just made a potentially blown call, the last thing I'd want to do is go to my car in the middle of the game to get my book. Now, everyone knows where I parked! :D

Maybe it's because you've got teams traveling from all over the country that they want you to get it resolved right away? Don't know. To me, I still don't like the idea. Then again, if there's a protest on one of my games and the teams have to come back to play from that point forward, it's not quite so long a drive.

Hint: Bug Me Not

Brief quote from the article: In the Rochester paper, she denies that. Phooey. She successfully bamboozled the umpires. Shame on the umpires, for sure, but double shame on the RAT.

Oh, there are so many ways this thread could go from here :rolleyes:

Hmmm... "Big Slick," huh? I'm staying far, far away from this one...

I don't ump college (I have a 8 to 5 job), however I will weigh in. I take it this rule was put in place to speed up the game and/or sportsmanship (no other reasons for such a dumb rule). If this is the logic behind the rule then the blues blew it. By definition a walk off HR means the game is over, therefore the game cannot be delayed. I also don't see how starting to celebrate a win via a HR 0' to 60' early constitutes a lack of sportsmanship. Therefore, the blues should have told the coach that in their judgment this was only a warning and walked of the field (no protest allowed).

Ron

And it is on a major river in PA. River . . . wilderness . . . Maybe Steve's new name will be "Ned".

Oh wait, he is bringing refreshments. Never mind. Steve, you are a wonderful crew member, best crew member ever!!

So, I'm not the only one hearing dueling banjos?

My first thought when reading the OP was what would Coach Musgjerd do if her team had hit the walk-off home run and her players high-fived the BR as she came around third base?

Think she would be running out there demanding that her player be called out because "the rules are the rules and they need to be enforced?"

What would she do if that was called against her...pitch a major fit, I'm guessing.....Sounds like a typical coach to me.





As for Steve and Big Slick...what happens when the refreshments run out?

I think I can faintly hear Dueling Banjos in the background......:eek:
(D*mn...somebody beat me to the Dueling Banjos reference!)

Just when you walk down into town.

Nope. Paddle faster.

But is he aware of your taste for Boone's Farm Strawberry Hill?


http://i.walmartimages.com/i/p/00/08...30_150X150.jpg

Oh, the Boone's will be out in full force. There is a store in this town that sells it (for those not aware, PA is the most backward state in which to purchase adult beverages).

It can't be stranger than Utah.

Just the thought sends shivers down my spine!!!! :eek:

Just to clear some f this - Big Slick and I are 2 of those on this board heading to a Regional. And while Sally, oops - did it again, I mean Big Slick likes some different kinds of drinks, I will have a cooler filled with some cold adult brews. We'll probably make a good sized dent in that this evening.

And Pa certainly is bass-ackwards regarding sales of adult beverages.

Yeah, sort of like when someone mentions Lone Star to me, and I'm not talking about a steak house :rolleyes:

Not just Lone Star. Heck...Budweiser and Miller have the same effect on me!

I'd rather drink Iron City than Miller or Bud. And none of them will be what I'll have in the cooler for tonight!

Iron City is just Lone Star East. Miller is water. I have no problem with Budweiser, preferably Dry or Select.

It's amazing how many threads on this board eventually become about beer! http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/er...smiley-004.gif

And your problem with that is........:D

FWIW
I don't know about the "double shame" on the RAT.
I don't really care about her and one may argue that she was just doing what RATs do... anything they can to win.

I'd still vote for double shame on the Umpires.
I may be mistaken, but I think at this level I'm supposed to know those rules or at least between my partners and myself, be able to get it correct....

BTW
This has not occurred in any of my games, but I would look at it as one warning per/event as opposed to one warning per person who touched the BR.

Maybe I'm completely clueless as to how junior college works, but I somehow doubt that's where they send their best umpires. Seems like a likely spot for a "proving ground" if I ever heard of one.

I'm not saying that as an excuse. Just saying I'm not surprised that if it were to happen anywhere, it'd happen there.

I don't know, either, but if Div 1 is the NCAA equivalent of HS Varsity, then JUCO is maybe like the 9th grade team?

Or, 18U Gold vs. 14U rec?

I dunno.... maybe I'm being unfair to JUCO teams.

The reason for the double shame for the coach is due to the classlessness of the whole thing. The umpires were ignorant of the rule, or else decided two players were a warning + an out, whatever. The coach was knowingly classless.

No problem at all... just an observation! ;)

No...that about sums it up.

As for the umpires that work JUCO ball...

Around here there are folk who may be working a DI game one day, and working JUCO the next, so the previous assessment(NCASA's) of umpires working JUCO ball is not necessarily true, though it is where most collegiate umpires begin their collegiate careers.

I agree about the classless act...
That's why they are called RATS.:D

Like I said, it was a FWIW comment.
My concern is more about us knowing the rules....

Maybe I phrased it poorly, but it wasn't meant an assessment of the umpires themselves. Instead, my statement was directed towards those in charge of prioritizing umpires and their assignments.

For example: I consider myself to be a pretty good umpire. However, I'm not above calling Coed C, like I did last night. At the same time, I was given a rookie partner who has only been calling for the last 3 weeks (and for the record, he did VERY well last night).

I'm sure JuCo has some excellent umpires in its ranks. However, I'm sure that this is where umpires are sent who have yet to prove themselves worthy of higher level assignments.

Okay, I know this will tick off somebody, but here goes.

If someone is using NJCAA as a "proving ground", there is a problem. OTOH, you also need to remember that though these umpires are often very good umpires, it doesn't make them the "best" of all umpires. It makes them the best available umpires.

Not everyone can dedicate the time needed to get to the highest level, but doesn't make them any less an umpire than those working the NCAA Championships.

I have an umpire in my area that has been offered more than a dozen ASA nationals, FP & SP, but due to his job and family commitments he has not been able to accept any. However, if I got a call from KR telling me he needed an umpire for 18U Gold championship, I wouldn't have any problem recommending him.

So if you're an assignor with a new person in your crew with whom you have limited to no experience, you wouldn't send them to the lower levels first and see how they do?

You're correct that not all umpires approach their duties the same way, and you're correct that they all have their own reasons. If they're honest with themselves and they're honest with their assignors, I see no problem with it whatsoever.

We've all spent our time in the trenches, and many of us are still taking grenades there during the week. :)

We are not talking about rookie umpires here. Just because they don't have experience at that level, to get to that consideration, they would have had to prove themselves elsewhere. This isn't like someone who has never umpired before or, at least, shouldn't be.

I've sent people to nationals and took a load of heat from different directions because others didn't believe they were ready or had enough experience at the lower levels. All returned with Excellent/Good evaluations. There is more to it than just working certain levels of the game.

If I were an assignor, I would probably assign a newer person along with an experienced person.
That accomplishes two things.

1) You have back-up for the less experienced guy.
2) you get an evaluation of the les experienced guy.

That's what seems to be done around here...

Right, but you're trusting that they were being sent to you with a blessing rather than a curse.

I fully recognize that if I were to move to someplace other than NC, I'd get stuck doing the bottom rung games for a while. And you know what? That's okay with me because A) someone has to do it, and B) my assignor hasn't gotten to know me yet.

You assign the people you have based upon how certain you are that they can handle that level. JuCo games, while still important, are not D1A.

I think that's what most responsible assignors do, and my assignor is one of them. I consider myself very fortunate to have him at the helm.

Yes. ;)

Oh, no, I've experienced that and it wasn't a lot of fun. I'm referring to umpires I have sent away.

Even in Cheeseland? :rolleyes:

I would do it for one reason, I'm an umpire.

Yet, there is a good possibility it may be a more difficult game to umpire. Wouldn't you want the experienced umpire here?

Oh ja, for sure!

Which is exactly why I tell my assignor, "I'll call whatever you put in front of me."

Oh, of course! There are some low-level teams in our area that are notorious for giving lesser-qualified umpires a harder time, and a stronger umpire should go to those games. My statement about JuCo is general in nature. Exceptions will always exist. :)

However... If this had happened in D1, I'm sure it wouldn't be just in local papers like what happened in this incident. It'd probably make it all the way to ESPN. Thus, as an assignor, you want to minimize the likelihood of that happening by putting your better umpires on those games.

Say what you want about JUCO, but Crystal Bustos was a JUCO player before she was on the national team. A lot of these players are DI players that are 'clearing house ineligible'.

On the other half of this thread, I am in PA right now and I made sure I bought enough beer for the weekend before I crossed the state line. :D Almost blew out my shocks, but the rest of it fit in the trailer.:cool:

Countdown with Keith OlbermannCountdown with Keith Olbermann

Coach made Olbermann's WORST PERSON IN THE WORLD!!

I'm surprised that the media actually researched and got the rule right.

My money is on that it was fed to them and little, if any, additional research was conducted.

rofl ..snap.
stupid umpires... sigh. (not stupid all the time... just stupid to get media coverage on this turd) sigh

Hmmm... Point taken. This is MSNBC, after all...

Yeah...but they are research geniuses compared to the folks at FOX!

I'm still figuring out if she would be a Pinhead or Patriot!!
Probablly she'd get the Patriot award since O'Reilly could never agree with Olbermann...

And either way, I'm sorry, but that crew gets my Pinhead award....

Hey now! ;)

I'll end this debate by saying: they ALL suck. Every one of 'em. They all suck.

Now, back to the OP...

Not all...
Now back to the OP ;):D