Stepping on the Plate

[JefferMC]

Would this be a tactic "noticeably designed to delay or to hasten the game"?

5.4.E anyone?

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by JefferMC

Would this be a tactic "noticeably designed to delay or to hasten the game"?

5.4.E anyone?

If it's SP, and we're in the bottom of 6th with only a few seconds left, chances are that the 7th would be pretty quick. I'd let it go. I might say something to the coach for hollering during the pitch, however.

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by JefferMC

Would this be a tactic "noticeably designed to delay or to hasten the game"?

5.4.E anyone?

Would what be a tactic "noticeably designed to delay or to hasten the game?"

Stepping on the plate is no tactic, period. There is no penalty for it, unless the batter makes contact with the ball. If they hit it with the bat, then we have a dead ball and an out. If it hits them, then it will be dead ball and either a strike or a ball depending on whether or not I judge it to be in the zone.

[JefferMC]

Originally Posted by Skahtboi

Would what be a tactic "noticeably designed to delay or to hasten the game?"

Stepping on the plate is no tactic, period. There is no penalty for it, unless the batter makes contact with the ball. If they hit it with the bat, then we have a dead ball and an out. If it hits them, then it will be dead ball and either a strike or a ball depending on whether or not I judge it to be in the zone.

Oh, I'd have to say that it was a tactic. Maybe not a useful or effective tactic. But not all tactics are useful or effective.

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by JefferMC

Oh, I'd have to say that it was a tactic. Maybe not a useful or effective tactic. But not all tactics are useful or effective.

Okay, it is a very poor tactic, but it certainly isn't a tactic designed to hasten or delay anything!

[BretMan]

Obviously, just stepping on the plate, in and of itself, isn't illegal. But let's change it up a bit. Suppose that in this same situation the coach instructed a player to:

- Purposely step on the plate and hit the ball- and he did.

- Purposely leave a base before the pitch reached the plate- and he did.

Now what do you do?

[Andy]

Scott - you're absolutely right, but it seems the intent of the coach was to get that third out and get to the next inning. The coach just did not know the rule (there is a big news flash!)

His intent was to "noticeably delay or to hasten the game?" so 5.4.E comes into effect. The penalty for violating this rule is forfieture of the game.
Since this is a pretty severe penalty, how about this approach; (first suggested by Dakota, if I remember correctly)

Coach: "Batter, step on the plate!"

Umpire: TIME! (wanders slowly over to the coach)

Umpire: "Coach, did you just tell your batter to step on the plate to create an out?"

Coach: "Yep"

Umpire: "Coach, you know that is in violation of rule 5.4.E don't you? Do you know what the penalty is for violation of that rule?"

Coach: "Uhhhh, No"

Umpire: "The penalty is that you forfeit the game, coach. Is that what you want?

If he says yes, go ahead....if he says no, hopefully, you will have taken enough time that the limit will have expired anyway and it becomes a moot point!

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by BretMan

Obviously, just stepping on the plate, in and of itself, isn't illegal. But let's change it up a bit. Suppose that in this same situation the coach instructed a player to:

- Purposely step on the plate and hit the ball- and he did.

- Purposely leave a base before the pitch reached the plate- and he did.

Now what do you do?

Just my opinion, but we should separate the two separate cases when this might occur.

1) Team A is thoroughly whipping Team B; they have already exceeded the run rule, or it is early, and a foregone conclusion that they will. Coach A is enacting a mercy killing, trying to allow Team B to bat again before their heads are so far up their tails that someone will get hurt.

I do nothing; or else I congratulate Coach A on his sportsmanship.

2) Team A is behind, and time is about to expire; if they make an intentional out, we get to stay for another full inning. This is being used as a strategy to extend the game, rather than simply play the game and let the clock happen.

Mixed feelings, and it may well depend on how the game has gone. If Team A has hustled all game long, and it's a close, competitive game, I may pretend I didn't hear it, so I just enforce the rule that applies. I'm not taking anything away from a team that has played hard and hustled.

But, as most often happens, Team A lollygagged all game long, and NOW they want to speed up the game; hell, no, it's THEIR fault the time is about to expire. I am calling time, before they commit the offense, and using however much time is necessary to kill the clock to explain to Coach A how that strategy violates the rule, and (oh yeah, by the way, coach), time has now expired.

But that's just me.

[Tru_in_Blu]

As a player/coach in a company intramural league [modified FP] several years ago, I was complicit in a similar situation.

My team was home, and we were in a game with lots of runs and walks. After 5 innings, the visitors were ahead by a run. It was starting to get dark, but the umps decided to try to get in one more inning. Visitors went out quickly in the top half of the inning.

Our half of the inning resulted in a couple of outs, sandwiched around a couple of walks. The visitors were delaying as much as they could, trying to get the game called due to darkness. Our next batter hit a gap double scoring the tying and go-ahead runs. Now the delays became more pronounced, although the umps never said anything about it. Maybe this was before such a rule was in place, I don't know.

The next batter got up, and there were pitches in the dirt, but not far enough away for the runner to advance. Throws back to the pitcher bounded away, all the while taking time. Outfielders were complaining that they couldn't see the ball. The umpires were becoming noticeably nervous about their decision to have started this last inning. The batter ultimately walked. The catcher wanted to talk to the pitcher.

Next batter came to bat. Since we now had a one-run lead, as the pitcher was holding the ball in the circle, delaying some more, I yelled out to the runner at second base: "Joel! Go to third base." He promptly stepped off the base to go to third, and the base umpire called him out.

Game over. We win by a run.

Was that a tactic? Was it illegal? Unethical? My guys thought it was "brilliant!" Umpires were relieved, too.

[Dholloway1962]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

Just my opinion, but we should separate the two separate cases when this might occur.

1) Team A is thoroughly whipping Team B; they have already exceeded the run rule, or it is early, and a foregone conclusion that they will. Coach A is enacting a mercy killing, trying to allow Team B to bat again before their heads are so far up their tails that someone will get hurt.

I do nothing; or else I congratulate Coach A on his sportsmanship.

2) Team A is behind, and time is about to expire; if they make an intentional out, we get to stay for another full inning. This is being used as a strategy to extend the game, rather than simply play the game and let the clock happen.

Mixed feelings, and it may well depend on how the game has gone. If Team A has hustled all game long, and it's a close, competitive game, I may pretend I didn't hear it, so I just enforce the rule that applies. I'm not taking anything away from a team that has played hard and hustled.

But, as most often happens, Team A lollygagged all game long, and NOW they want to speed up the game; hell, no, it's THEIR fault the time is about to expire. I am calling time, before they commit the offense, and using however much time is necessary to kill the clock to explain to Coach A how that strategy violates the rule, and (oh yeah, by the way, coach), time has now expired.

But that's just me.

In your second situation the team is prolonging the game, not dealying or hastening it. What rule are you going to use to enforce a penalty.

But, if you are going to use the rule, it should be applied the same to both situations you described. You shouldn't pick and choose when you want to use it.

I'm not sure the reasoning for this rule, but I think it might have been for coaching using tactics not covered in the rule book to delay the game? Coaches have the right to use rules to their advantage when necessary don't they?

[tmielke]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

I am calling time, before they commit the offense, and using however much time is necessary to kill the clock to explain to Coach A how that strategy violates the rule, and (oh yeah, by the way, coach), time has now expired.

I have coached, I prefer to umpire. Maybe my perspective is a bit different.

Let the players play, let the coach coach, I'll call balls, strikes and outs. I don't see any need to get involved in the outcome of the game by managing the clock for the coach.

A timed softball game is no different than any other timed gamed, clock management becomes part of the game. An umpire purposefully delaying the game because they don't like the lack of hustle of a team is a lot closer to unsportsmanlike conduct than a coach hollering at Suzie to leave early.

What makes it ok for the umpire to delay the game when it is against the rules for the participants to delay the game?

Tom

[okla21fan]

Originally Posted by JefferMC

Would this be a tactic "noticeably designed to delay or to hasten the game"?

5.4.E anyone?

'extending' the game does not necessarily mean "noticeably designed to delay or to hasten the game".

By stepping on the plate (FP with the pitcher toed up) or SP (stepping on the plate and making contact with the ball) or a base runner vacating a base, all in order to get an out(s) to get to the next inning is simply that, getting to the next inning. This is 'extending' the game and not 'delaying or hastening' the game as the game is still continuing, and I would simply apply the rule for the violation and play another inning. That is the nature if the beast of a 'time limit' game.

just my 2 cents

[BretMan]

Originally Posted by okla21fan

By stepping on the plate (FP with the pitcher toed up) or SP (stepping on the plate and making contact with the ball)...in order to get an out(s) to get to the next inning...

Not to get off the subject of enforcing a potential "delaying or hastening the game" situation (because it is an interesting topic), but the above quote seems to imply that you think there is a different rule about stepping on the plate for fastpitch and slow pitch.

There isn't. Both require the batter to actually contact the ball with the bat while touching the plate.

Are you maybe confusing the rule about stepping across the plate, as in switching to the other batter's box, while the pitcher is in position to pitch?

[okla21fan]

Originally Posted by BretMan

Are you maybe confusing the rule about stepping across the plate, as in switching to the other batter's box, while the pitcher is in position to pitch?

yep