No bat restrictions?

[WestMichiganBlue]

A tournament organization uses ASA rules and ASA umpires. Their published tournament rules state, "There are no bat restrictions."

That means that we have to allow bats that are illegal by ASA standards. Do you feel comfortable with this from a liability standpoint? Would you work believing the tournament organization has assumed the liability? Or would you refuse to work?

WMB

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by WestMichiganBlue

A tournament organization uses ASA rules and ASA umpires. Their published tournament rules state, "There are no bat restrictions."

That means that we have to allow bats that are illegal by ASA standards. Do you feel comfortable with this from a liability standpoint? Would you work believing the tournament organization has assumed the liability? Or would you refuse to work?

WMB

Does "published tournament rules" include wording of absolute clarity that "non-legal" bats are allowed or just that that tournament has no additions? We all know about assuming anything, so will they take liability in writing or with agreement of insurance company or lawyer.

[NCASAUmp]

I'm no lawyer, but... If the published tournament rules are that they have no bat restrictions, then it appears that everyone is being made aware of the issue, and you, as the umpire, are off the hook.

This doesn't sound like a registered ASA event, though. I don't know if your Bollinger insurance would cover you.

[wadeintothem]

If the commish is sanctioning it and hence I think my ASA insurance would cover it (I would find out to be sure), I could care less.

If no ASA insurance - nope, I wouldnt work it.

I have no "moral qualms" about ASA bat rules. I enforce it only because thats my job.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by WestMichiganBlue

...Do you feel comfortable with this from a liability standpoint?...

Yes, if it was in the published tournament rules, I would be comfortable (and, I believe, covered) from a liability standpoint.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

I'm no lawyer, but... If the published tournament rules are that they have no bat restrictions, then it appears that everyone is being made aware of the issue, and you, as the umpire, are off the hook.

This doesn't sound like a registered ASA event, though. I don't know if your Bollinger insurance would cover you.

As long as the tournament was sanctioned and teams/umpires were registered ASA, your insurance will cover you as the umpire.

And before someone asks, my response is "because Bollinger said so."

[outathm]

If Irish says your covered I would feel comfortable working. I am sure he has been down this road a time or two when tourney rules conflict with the actual rules.

This weekend I worked a 'showcase' that was 'ASA' but free subs in pool play and only 8 after 5 as run rule. Rune rule didn't come into effect, but you should have seen the confusion on coach's faces when I didn't want to write down the changes on the lineups I didn't take at the pregame.

To be the first to take a thread off subject, found a great Microbrewery in Raleigh, but man it was hidden!!

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by outathm

If Irish says your covered I would feel comfortable working. I am sure he has been down this road a time or two when tourney rules conflict with the actual rules.

Right. I think that the bottom line is that if it's well-known IN WRITING in advance that all bat restrictions are off, you, the umpire, are off the hook. You are following the procedures set forth by the tourney, so it won't be your butt in the Defendant's chair if something should happen involving a Freak Plus.

Originally Posted by outathm

This weekend I worked a 'showcase' that was 'ASA' but free subs in pool play and only 8 after 5 as run rule. Rune rule didn't come into effect, but you should have seen the confusion on coach's faces when I didn't want to write down the changes on the lineups I didn't take at the pregame.

Was it any different from their usual confused looks?

Originally Posted by outathm

To be the first to take a thread off subject, found a great Microbrewery in Raleigh, but man it was hidden!!

I see a rabbit hole up ahead...

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

As long as the tournament was sanctioned and teams/umpires were registered ASA, your insurance will cover you as the umpire.

And before someone asks, my response is "because Bollinger said so."

So the questions are:

Is the tourney sanctioned by ASA, or are they just using their ruleset and umpires?

Are the teams registered with ASA?

Are you registered with ASA as an umpire?

I predict only one "yes" answer.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

So the questions are:

Is the tourney sanctioned by ASA, or are they just using their ruleset and umpires?

Are the teams registered with ASA?

Are you registered with ASA as an umpire?

I predict only one "yes" answer.

None of this matters if you have your insurance from NASO or from the NFHS Officials Association.

[SRW]

We have the same issue up here in some SP tourneys we're putting on. ASA ruleset, except the bat rule.

Word from WBS and MB - they can play with broomsticks and hand gernades for all we care. If they're registered with ASA, it's no different than a league deciding to use 0.50 COR balls vs. 0.44 COR. Liability and insurance issues won't exist because of this.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by SRW

We have the same issue up here in some SP tourneys we're putting on. ASA ruleset, except the bat rule.

Word from WBS and MB - they can play with broomsticks and hand gernades for all we care. If they're registered with ASA, it's no different than a league deciding to use 0.50 COR balls vs. 0.44 COR. Liability and insurance issues won't exist because of this.

SRW will confirm (if he was in the room instead of the Western wear store across the street) that AJ from Bollinger stated at the UIC Clinic that while they preferred all be more concerned of the equipment, the use of non-approved equipment would not invalidate your insurance as long as all conditions of coverage were met.

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by SRW

they can play with broomsticks and hand gernades for all we care.

Those were the exact words used by the bollinger rep at the regional meeting.
(as long as its ASA sanctioned)

[outathm]

Is anyone else saddened by the state of our society that we have to have a rep from the insurance company at a regional umpires meeting. I imagine he spent more than 5 minutes talking, and that is 5 minutes plus of instructional time taken up that in years past was unnecessary.

Sorry, Rant off.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by outathm

Is anyone else saddened by the state of our society that we have to have a rep from the insurance company at a regional umpires meeting. I imagine he spent more than 5 minutes talking, and that is 5 minutes plus of instructional time taken up that in years past was unnecessary.

Sorry, Rant off.

Better an insurance rep than legal counsel.

Not by much, though.