skipping your time at bat

[Little Jimmy]

I was told about a situation that happened in a JV game yesterday and wanted to see what you guys thought about it. As head of my local association I want to tell my umps how to handle this in the future.

Fed rules. We have a very poor JV team that has problems scoring any runs or preventing their opponent from scoring. At the end of the 4th inning the visiting team was ahead 24-0. Instead of switching places and taking their turn at bat, they convinced the home team and the umpires that they would like to forgo their time at bat in the top of the 5th and simply stay in the field to speed up the game. All agreed to do this and the 5th inning ended 3 batters later.

I was told about this yesterday and it doesn't sit well with me. The only game ending proceedure we have officially is a 10 after 5 run ahead rule. Fed 4-2-3 certainly states that "by mutual agreement of the opposing coaches and the plate umpire, any remaining play can be shortened at any time or the game terminated". But to do so simply by stating you do not want to bat seems to be a stretch. Everyone wants to get these types of games over with as soon as possible but this doesn't seem right to me. Any ideas or opinions?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Little Jimmy

I was told about a situation that happened in a JV game yesterday and wanted to see what you guys thought about it. As head of my local association I want to tell my umps how to handle this in the future.

Fed rules. We have a very poor JV team that has problems scoring any runs or preventing their opponent from scoring. At the end of the 4th inning the visiting team was ahead 24-0. Instead of switching places and taking their turn at bat, they convinced the home team and the umpires that they would like to forgo their time at bat in the top of the 5th and simply stay in the field to speed up the game. All agreed to do this and the 5th inning ended 3 batters later.

I was told about this yesterday and it doesn't sit well with me. The only game ending proceedure we have officially is a 10 after 5 run ahead rule. Fed 4-2-3 certainly states that "by mutual agreement of the opposing coaches and the plate umpire, any remaining play can be shortened at any time or the game terminated". But to do so simply by stating you do not want to bat seems to be a stretch. Everyone wants to get these types of games over with as soon as possible but this doesn't seem right to me. Any ideas or opinions?

"Official" game ending procedure, no. If all parties agree in front of multiple witnesses at a JV game. not a problem with me. In spite of what the rule states, they really don't need the plate umpire to agree.

At least in my area, JV is not a competition leading to playoffs or championship levels. The two people making the decision are the ones who are paying you to be there, they are the customer. The team is doing you a favor if stats/scores are to be submitted to an authoritive organization as it will show the losing team batting the required number of times.

And the best of all, what if the coaches just tell you the game is over, go away? What are you going to do? Tell them that the game MUST be played to an official end and the teams MUST continue playing? And you are going to do what when they laugh at you?

Don't sweat it. At no time can you FORCE a team to play. Want to file a report to insure full fee will be paid? Shouldn't be a problem, file away. If any of the HS org. have a problem, they can take it up with the coaches and respective school administrators.

JMHO

[Little Jimmy]

Points well taken. I guess in situations like this I start to think what the next level would be. Hypothetical. After 1st inning one team leads 10 nothing. They decide to forgoe all at bats for rest of game. Still OK?

I know and agree that the teams are our customers and we work for them and the local school system (at least for high school ball). But at some point... I don't know. Play the game.

But my wife says that's my problem. I think too much.

[CecilOne]

A team refusing to play is a forfeit.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

A team refusing to play is a forfeit.

And if both teams are telling you it is over, what are you going to do?

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by Little Jimmy

I was told about a situation that happened in a JV game yesterday and wanted to see what you guys thought about it. As head of my local association I want to tell my umps how to handle this in the future.

Fed rules. We have a very poor JV team that has problems scoring any runs or preventing their opponent from scoring. At the end of the 4th inning the visiting team was ahead 24-0. Instead of switching places and taking their turn at bat, they convinced the home team and the umpires that they would like to forgo their time at bat in the top of the 5th and simply stay in the field to speed up the game. All agreed to do this and the 5th inning ended 3 batters later.

I was told about this yesterday and it doesn't sit well with me. The only game ending proceedure we have officially is a 10 after 5 run ahead rule. Fed 4-2-3 certainly states that "by mutual agreement of the opposing coaches and the plate umpire, any remaining play can be shortened at any time or the game terminated". But to do so simply by stating you do not want to bat seems to be a stretch. Everyone wants to get these types of games over with as soon as possible but this doesn't seem right to me. Any ideas or opinions?

Our local listing on this type of sitch would be a forfeit right at the point that the team declined to take their turn at bat. This would be followed by a report to our assignor, who would then send it to the state HS association.
Ball is then in their court. While yes it's JV, and there are no standings etc., there is an issue of the team being classified non-competitive. In previous years (and in sports other than FP), teams have been forced to suspend their season do to issues that have made them non-competitive, injuries, budget, academic, excessive cancellations (not related to weather/grounds) etc. at the V, JV, or freshman level.
As umps, not really our issue, we just report it and the state assoc. takes it from there....however it is not within our authority here to "OK" the game being played in a manner not listed in the rule book.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by KJUmp

Our local listing on this type of sitch would be a forfeit right at the point that the team declined to take their turn at bat. This would be followed by a report to our assignor, who would then send it to the state HS association.
Ball is then in their court. While yes it's JV, and there are no standings etc., there is an issue of the team being classified non-competitive. In previous years (and in sports other than FP), teams have been forced to suspend their season do to issues that have made them non-competitive, injuries, budget, academic, excessive cancellations (not related to weather/grounds) etc. at the V, JV, or freshman level.
As umps, not really our issue, we just report it and the state assoc. takes it from there....however it is not within our authority here to "OK" the game being played in a manner not listed in the rule book.

I don't think what you are proposing is possible. How can you forfeit a game against one team for not batting when there is no defense in the field?

Report it, sure. Go crazy about it? Like you said, not really the umpire's issue. It is also not unheard of happening, nor anything new. If neither team wants to continue playing (remember, both teams agreed to this), what are you going to do?

[Tru_in_Blu]

I've had some lopsided scores at sub-varsity and middle school levels, but nothing that had one team skipping a half-inning of offense.

It did happen in one of those lopsided church league games that was about 34-2 at the time. This league included a bylaw to override the ASA run rule and added that it was the discretion of the losing team's manager if they wanted to invoke the run rule. I'd say in the last 3 or 4 years, I've only had one game where the losing team invoked the rule. That makes for some really looooong games. But in this one game, the team on defense was ahead a ton, and after they recorded the 3rd out of the 6th inning, said they had just gone out 1-2-3 in their half of the inning on offense. So they just stayed on defense, got the last 3 outs and the game was finally over. I almost said "mercifully" over, but apparently, there is no mercy in the church league. And plenty of holey gloves!

[SC Ump]

Originally Posted by Little Jimmy

... they convinced the home team and the umpires that they would like to forgo their time at bat in the top of the 5th and simply stay in the field to speed up the game. All agreed ...

I guess if the umpire wanted to run it strickly by the rule book, he could have told the Visiting team they would have to take their turn at bat. Then the visitors could:

> take their place in the batter's box and then leave and enter the dugout.
> step from left to right batter's box just as the pitcher was getting ready to deliver.
> take nine delay of game penalties for not entering the batter's box.
> wipe out a whole bunch of lines on the field.
> get on base, leave early, get on base, etc.

But, why?

[Little Jimmy]

I guess if the umpire wanted to run it strickly by the rule book, he could have told the Visiting team they would have to take their turn at bat. Then the visitors could:

> take their place in the batter's box and then leave and enter the dugout.
> step from left to right batter's box just as the pitcher was getting ready to deliver.
> take nine delay of game penalties for not entering the batter's box.
> wipe out a whole bunch of lines on the field.
> get on base, leave early, get on base, etc.

But, why?

Or bunt everytime to the pitcher. Or bat opposite handed.

At some point a coach has to coach and a player has to play. If it's in the rules I support it. If it's not, then I don't want to make it up. If a team has had enough say so. The rules support a game ending in that manner.

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I don't think what you are proposing is possible. How can you forfeit a game against one team for not batting when there is no defense in the field?

Report it, sure. Go crazy about it? Like you said, not really the umpire's issue. It is also not unheard of happening, nor anything new. If neither team wants to continue playing (remember, both teams agreed to this), what are you going to do?

Simple, I'm going to do what my state HS association directed me to do in such a situation, stop the game right there, file the report, they declare the game a forfeit.
It's a forfeit because the team "refused to continue to play" (yes, in this sitch I realize they're refusing/declining to continue to play offense), but the fact remains that for all intents and purposes they're saying..."we've had enough, we don't want to play anymore."

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by KJUmp

Simple, I'm going to do what my state HS association directed me to do in such a situation, stop the game right there, file the report, they declare the game a forfeit.
It's a forfeit because the team "refused to continue to play" (yes, in this sitch I realize they're refusing/declining to continue to play offense), but the fact remains that fro all intents and purposes they're saying..."we've had enough, we don't want to play anymore."

I'm not suggesting the umpire not file the required reports, but more toward LJ's concern that it bothered him.

ASA had a proposed change a couple years ago that would have allowed such a move legal. I believe there is a sanctioning body which does allow this presently.

[tmielke]

Originally Posted by KJUmp

Simple, I'm going to do what my state HS association directed me to do in such a situation, stop the game right there, file the report, they declare the game a forfeit.
It's a forfeit because the team "refused to continue to play" (yes, in this sitch I realize they're refusing/declining to continue to play offense), but the fact remains that for all intents and purposes they're saying..."we've had enough, we don't want to play anymore."

If the team that is supposed to bat stays on defense and the team that is supposed to be on defense stays in the dug out waiting for you to allow them to bat again who forfeits?

[greymule]

In one particular league, I permitted bat-skipping several times. It was a business league in which one company's team was loaded with serious players and usually won by big scores. On some evenings, after the second or third inning they would simply field and not bat.

What kind of satisfaction they got from constantly beating up on teams several levels below them, I can't imagine.

I guess skipping a turn at bat is preferable to what I used to see in a nearby township when I lived in New Jersey. Again, one team was so strong that they invariably went beyond the mercy rule limit early, so before the required number of innings, they would switch their infield and outfield and otherwise do what they had to in order to let the other team back in the game. Just to keep the game going, they always kept the opposition within the mercy limit.

As an indication of how things had deteriorated in that once-balanced and strong rec league, the team that crushed everybody contained guys I had played with and against 25 years earlier, some of them now ridiculously beefed up and barely recognizable. So a team of guys in their 50s spent the season crushing all comers, to what end, again I can't imagine.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by greymule

In one particular league, I permitted bat-skipping several times. It was a business league in which one company's team was loaded with serious players and usually won by big scores. On some evenings, after the second or third inning they would simply field and not bat.

What kind of satisfaction they got from constantly beating up on teams several levels below them, I can't imagine.

I guess skipping a turn at bat is preferable to what I used to see in a nearby township when I lived in New Jersey. Again, one team was so strong that they invariably went beyond the mercy rule limit early, so before the required number of innings, they would switch their infield and outfield and otherwise do what they had to in order to let the other team back in the game. Just to keep the game going, they always kept the opposition within the mercy limit.

As an indication of how things had deteriorated in that once-balanced and strong rec league, the team that crushed everybody contained guys I had played with and against 25 years earlier, some of them now ridiculously beefed up and barely recognizable. So a team of guys in their 50s spent the season crushing all comers, to what end, again I can't imagine.

Most of these teams are just there to get batting practice to break in their Freak 98s and Mayhems.

A number of years ago, we had a local coed league that had one team full of travel players playing against your typical local husband/wife boyfriend/girlfriend teams. A new run-ahead rule had to be instituted: 20 after 3, and 12 after 5 (WELL before ASA changed their run-ahead rule). We very frequently hit 20 after 3.

That team was the "beginning of the end." The coed league no longer exists.