fielders yelling

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by chymechowder

somewhat along these lines, have you ever had hitters complain about fielders moving while the pitch is in the air?

only thing I can find close (in USSSA) is the prohibition against trying to get in the batter's line of sight. like a kamikaze 3B can't go running down the line and cut in front of the plate just before the swing.

but i've had a couple batters protest about infielders cheating left or right while the pitch is on the way. anything to this?

And I hope while they are complaining you are calling a strike.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by chymechowder

somewhat along these lines, have you ever had hitters complain about fielders moving while the pitch is in the air?

only thing I can find close (in USSSA) is the prohibition against trying to get in the batter's line of sight. like a kamikaze 3B can't go running down the line and cut in front of the plate just before the swing.

but i've had a couple batters protest about infielders cheating left or right while the pitch is on the way. anything to this?

Cheating left or right? Totally fine. Nothing wrong with it. Fielders are not required to be statues during the pitch.

[7in60]

Originally Posted by steveshane67

Is there a rule prohibiting me from taking a dump on 1B? I understand your logic, and it would be great if this we were talking about legalese or an "expertly" written document.

That is covered by the rule that states that all players must wear the same uniform.

[steveshane67]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

Sure, thats obviously an unsportsmanlike (and btw, illegal) act, so that would not be in the same realm as your op.

Unless you are actually contending taking a dump in middle of a game field compares to a RF yelling swing.\\
Which.. if you think it compares, why even ask?

IMO, this is a common sense thing and ASA conveys that with they way they wrote the rule.

If its less/minor, it is over looked. Unless it rises to the level of USC, it is nothing.

unless im missing something, there is no definition of USC in the 08 ASA rulebook. it mentions

EJECTED PARTICIPANT: A team representative removed from the game by the
umpire, usually for an unsportsmanlike act or conduct.

A fielder shall not take a position in the batter’s line of vision or, with deliberate
unsportsmanlike intent,

When base runners switch positions on the bases they occupied following
any conference.
EFFECT: Each runner on an improper base shall be declared out. In addition,
the head coach shall be ejected for unsportsmanlike conduct.

thats why i was wondering if yelling was considered USC and made the post about nothing [explicitly] prohibiting me from dropping one on 1st

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by steveshane67

unless im missing something, there is no definition of USC in the 08 ASA rulebook. ...

Which, IMO, is a good thing since it allows the umpire the room to make a reasonable judgment based on the situation at hand. How would you even craft a helpful rule about things like "players yelling?"

[Tru_in_Blu]

I worked an invitational tournament [ASA 12U game] where the team at bat was making a lot of noise. The tournament had a specific restriction about artificial noise-makers such as air horns, clackers, bull horns, cow bells, etc.

These girls were just LOUDLY cheering their team. There may have been a subtle [or not] attempt to rattle the defensive team. But their cheers were the typical 12U stuff: Good eye - BALL! Good eye - BALL!; I see a GAP and Susie's goin' shoppin'!

So the defensive coach asks for time and wants me to stop the other team from cheering because it's bothering his pitcher. I told him there's no rule against cheering, or how loudly. I've heard no profanity, nothing addressing anyone but their own teammates. I reminded him of the tournament rules about artificial noisemakers and said I didn't hear any bats clanging on the fence or benches. Also, HIS team was entitled to make just as much noise as they wanted given the same restrictions.

Next half inning, the offended team is up on the fence doing their thing, loudly. Another half inning after that, things toned down significantly. I think they all just yelled themselves out.

[steveshane67]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Which, IMO, is a good thing since it allows the umpire the room to make a reasonable judgment based on the situation at hand. How would you even craft a helpful rule about things like "players yelling?"

but theres no definition of unsportsmanlike conduct, yet "stupid" things like coach, defensive team, fly ball..... are defined.

how can you craft a document, that says X is not allowed, but not define what X is? at least give a generic difinition.

what i would do if i was writing the rules is say USC is any act ........... which includes, but not limited to A) B) C) D) (the most common egregious acts like violent avoidable collisions)

[Dakota]

Which would have what to do with players yelling? The problem with listing only the egregious acts is people get the idea that USC must be something of the same kind. Kind of like people get the idea that the only rights we have under the constitution are those explicitly listed in the bill of rights.

NFHS does have a fairly extensive list, if you want to refer to something.

[robbie]

Why do you need USC to hanlde this at all?

It can easily be ruled obstruction (at least in NSA)

"Obstruction is the act of a defensive team member who hinders or impedes a batter's attempt to make contact with a pitched ball.................. The act may be intentional or unitntentional, physical or verbal."

[steveshane67]

Originally Posted by robbie

Why do you need USC to hanlde this at all?

It can easily be ruled obstruction (at least in NSA)

"Obstruction is the act of a defensive team member who hinders or impedes a batter's attempt to make contact with a pitched ball.................. The act may be intentional or unitntentional, physical or verbal."

I was asking about ASA, which i just found in the rule supplement that verbal distraction is a form of INT, but it makes do explicit ruling on verbal "Batter distraction"

[steveshane67]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Which would have what to do with players yelling? The problem with listing only the egregious acts is people get the idea that USC must be something of the same kind. Kind of like people get the idea that the only rights we have under the constitution are those explicitly listed in the bill of rights.

NFHS does have a fairly extensive list, if you want to refer to something.

this is just getting kinda ridiculous now bc we are talking about a hypothetical rule that someone hypothetically might make, but theres 0 chance of this ever happening. BUT, you must have not notice the part where I said "....including, BUT NOT LIMITED TO...."

[Umpteenth]

I have to ask, because you have brought this up before - the fact that you play and you umpire. Are you asking from the perspective of officiating a game, or are you trying to get someone here to tell you what you can get away with?

If you are officiating, you should be able to make the judgment call as to whether or not a batter was impeded by the verbal or physical action of a defensive player. If you cannot make that judgment, perhaps you should not be officiating.

If you are asking from the perspective of a player, then be prepared to be called for Obstruction or USC at some point, when you have pushed too many buttons.

[steveshane67]

Originally Posted by Umpteenth

I have to ask, because you have brought this up before - the fact that you play and you umpire. Are you asking from the perspective of officiating a game, or are you trying to get someone here to tell you what you can get away with?

If you are officiating, you should be able to make the judgment call as to whether or not a batter was impeded by the verbal or physical action of a defensive player. If you cannot make that judgment, perhaps you should not be officiating.

If you are asking from the perspective of a player, then be prepared to be called for Obstruction or USC at some point, when you have pushed too many buttons.

im asking from the perspective of a player who hates it when other teams yell during recreational games. I really dont mind it, if it ever happens, when i play on "high" level teams, usually bc it only happens between 2 friends joking around, but it annoys the heck out of me when someone does it to be a douche in a rec level league, especially when they do it to girls.

when i umpire ive always asked the players not to "do that anymore" and theyve always complied.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by steveshane67

this is just getting kinda ridiculous now bc we are talking about a hypothetical rule that someone hypothetically might make, but theres 0 chance of this ever happening. BUT, you must have not notice the part where I said "....including, BUT NOT LIMITED TO...."

The hypothetical was only brought up because you wanted an explicit rule.

My position is it is best without the explicit rule / definition.

If the intent is to allow the USC call to be made for acts not of the same kind as listed, adding "but not limited to" is of marginal use if what follows is a specific list of egregious acts. The list itself would tend to limit the scope of acts considered even with the "but not limited to" phrase.

Because something is annoying does not make it illegal or unsporting.