The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Mon Aug 02, 2010, 10:55pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Then again if the ruling was that the game should have ended there can be no further action. If there was no further legal action, how could a team be expected to protest something that never officially happened to begin?

I think this whole situation, and thread, is the result of many people overthinking a real simple mistake with a very absolute solution.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 03, 2010, 08:07am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 77
While I also don't particularly agree with the final decision on the situation that Big Slick mentioned, I see the reasoning behind it. The umpires, by misapplying a playing rule, allowed the game to continue. Therefore, the game never ended. The offended coach (the home team) should have filed a protest right there for a misapplication of a playing rule. That would have made it simple. Instead, he/she did not, and therefore the game continued.

What other instance can you think of that would allow someone outside of the game (in this case, the rules interpreter) to interject on an umpire's ruling on the field without a proper protest by the coaches? None, and obviously the rules interpreter felt the same way.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 03, 2010, 08:12am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: NC
Posts: 4,361
Quote:
Originally Posted by PSUchem View Post
While I also don't particularly agree with the final decision on the situation that Big Slick mentioned, I see the reasoning behind it. The umpires, by misapplying a playing rule, allowed the game to continue. Therefore, the game never ended. The offended coach (the home team) should have filed a protest right there for a misapplication of a playing rule. That would have made it simple. Instead, he/she did not, and therefore the game continued.
So let's say the other team protested. What then? It goes back to the same "rules interpreter," who is extremely unlikely to say, "oh, yeah... you're right, I was completely wrong."

And yes, they were wrong. Once the umpires leave the field, that's it. No more protests or appeals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PSUchem View Post
What other instance can you think of that would allow someone outside of the game (in this case, the rules interpreter) to interject on an umpire's ruling on the field without a proper protest by the coaches? None, and obviously the rules interpreter felt the same way.
None whatsoever. If if they tried, they'd have to find a new umpire.

Address the problem in private, away from the field. Overrulling me on the field without being prompted by a protest is, in my opinion, a complete usurpation of my authority, and I'll quit before allowing that to happen, never to call for them again.
__________________
Dave

I haven't decided if I should call it from the dugout or the outfield. Apparently, both have really great views!

Screw green, it ain't easy being blue!

I won't be coming here that much anymore. I might check in now and again.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 03, 2010, 08:46am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCASAUmp View Post
So let's say the other team protested. What then? It goes back to the same "rules interpreter," who is extremely unlikely to say, "oh, yeah... you're right, I was completely wrong."

And yes, they were wrong. Once the umpires leave the field, that's it. No more protests or appeals.
Not sure what you mean by "going back to the same rules interpreter" and her saying that she was wrong. She would have never made the first ruling in the first place. I'm talking about a protest of a misapplication of the playing rule. If that had been done, the rules interpreter would have been able to rule on that subject, and the actual outcome might never have taken place.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 03, 2010, 09:52am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: NC
Posts: 4,361
Quote:
Originally Posted by PSUchem View Post
Not sure what you mean by "going back to the same rules interpreter" and her saying that she was wrong. She would have never made the first ruling in the first place. I'm talking about a protest of a misapplication of the playing rule. If that had been done, the rules interpreter would have been able to rule on that subject, and the actual outcome might never have taken place.
My understanding of Big Slick's sitch and your response was that the umpires were told by the rule interpreter to continue the game. If the other team had filed a protest that the game should not have been continued, who would the protest have gone to? Someone else? Sounded to me like it would go back to the same rule interpreter who told the umpires to resume the game.
__________________
Dave

I haven't decided if I should call it from the dugout or the outfield. Apparently, both have really great views!

Screw green, it ain't easy being blue!

I won't be coming here that much anymore. I might check in now and again.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 03, 2010, 10:17am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCASAUmp View Post
My understanding of Big Slick's sitch and your response was that the umpires were told by the rule interpreter to continue the game. If the other team had filed a protest that the game should not have been continued, who would the protest have gone to? Someone else? Sounded to me like it would go back to the same rule interpreter who told the umpires to resume the game.
That's not how I read it. I think the umpires were talking into returning by the visitor's AC. I think the rule inventor was brought in later - not sure if she was just called with a question, or if it was in response to a complaint. That part wasn't clear, but I do believe it was later.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 03, 2010, 10:21am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: PA
Posts: 537
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCASAUmp View Post
My understanding of Big Slick's sitch and your response was that the umpires were told by the rule interpreter to continue the game. If the other team had filed a protest that the game should not have been continued, who would the protest have gone to? Someone else? Sounded to me like it would go back to the same rule interpreter who told the umpires to resume the game.
No, the rule interpreter did not get involved until the situation was presented to her a day or two after.

Simply stated:
The umpires, after leaving the field, honored the appeal. This was a misapplication of rule
Quote:
6.12.2 It is a regulation game when the umpire terminates play by calling, “Game.” If a team wishes to lodge an appeal or protest on the final play of the game, it must immediately inform the plate umpire of that intent.
And rules
Quote:
7.1.1.4 Participation by an improper player: batting out of order, player who is listed inaccurately on the lineup card, unreported player and illegal player. (See Rule 8.3 and Appendix B.)
7.1.1.4.1 Must be a dead-ball appeal. 7.1.1.4.2 Must be made before the umpires leave the field of play.
This situation was brought to the attention of the rule interpreter by the head of the umpiring group, as this game could have influenced conference standing and championship seeding. Like everyone else, we (the umpire's group) expected the home team to be awarded the victory . . after all, the game ended (6.2 Game Winner - The winner of the game shall be the team that scores more runs in a regulation game. 6.12.1 A regulation game shall be seven innings). However, we noticed that the conference standing were never changed to indicate a victory by the home team.

A few weeks later, while in conversation with the term expiring rules interpreter, I made the comment: "I know you were asked a lot of strange things this year, but was there any stranger than what happened at (location)?" Other umpires then inquired what happened, the story was told. That's when she gave your interpretation that 1) this was a misapplication of a playing rule(s), 2) home team had a right to protest and did not. I was shocked, because I believed in the absolute nature of 6.2/6.12.1. Therefore, I asked if a coach is protected by these rules. Well, I guess you know how this ends. And if the home coach protest before the "resumption", yes, that protest would have been upheld.

As I said before, all rule codes have these set of rules about a regulation game and appeal procedure at the end of a game. They are all the same. And Irish made a great statement, about this rule being absolute. However, if these rules are absolute or not absolute is a matter of interpretation for a particular rule code. Sometimes you have to allow the authority of a rule code exercise that authority. That doesn't make anyone wrong or right, it allows rule codes to govern by their own spirit and philosophy.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 03, 2010, 10:52am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Woodstock, GA; Atlanta area
Posts: 2,822
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Slick View Post
However, if these rules are absolute or not absolute is a matter of interpretation for a particular rule code. Sometimes you have to allow the authority of a rule code exercise that authority. That doesn't make anyone wrong or right, it allows rule codes to govern by their own spirit and philosophy.
Or, she was wrong, but still had the authority to be wrong.

There are, in my opinion, several rule interpretations in every rule set that absolutely contradict the written rules. But, until a new broom sweeps the floor, that is the interpretation we must use.

Examples; 1) This ruling in the 4 letter sanction with the term-expiring authority. 2) The ruling of this same body that a pitch delivered behind the back is "forward and past the straight line of the body". 3) The NFHS ruling that throwing the ball to 1st on a walk before the BR reaches the base can be a "play" that can be interference. 4) ASA ruling that a glove with a logo or writing that is a different color than the body of the glove is multicolored.

Oh well. None is supported by rule; but we must support them.
__________________
Steve
ASA/ISF/NCAA/NFHS/PGF
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 03, 2010, 08:48am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by PSUchem View Post
What other instance can you think of that would allow someone outside of the game (in this case, the rules interpreter) to interject on an umpire's ruling on the field without a proper protest by the coaches? None, and obviously the rules interpreter felt the same way.
I can think of one, and only one... and it's actually quite similar to what we're talking about. (And it wasn't even the rules interpretor - it was simply the League President).

A league I was working had in their Calvinball rules that "No inning shall start with less than 5 minutes on the clock." Never mind that this is a stupid rule - it was what it was. In this particular case, this was the first week of the season, and while they bothered to get their made-up rules to the coaches, no one bothered to tell the umpires that there was ANY made-up rules, so we didn't know about this one.

Inning ends - 2 minutes to go (I know - my fault, right?). We tell HT to take the field. After 2 batters, LP wanders over and gets our attention, and tells us the rule. We ask to see it, he shows us, Game over, retroactively. No protest necessary. Why? Because the game ends when the game ends. Similar to the sitch we're talking about, really. And those 2 batters never happened.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Playing a Man Down grunewar Basketball 0 Thu Jan 28, 2010 09:29am
Playing Up Ref Ump Welsch Football 3 Mon Oct 19, 2009 09:50am
Playing with 8 and ITB reccer Softball 8 Tue Jul 29, 2008 11:18am
Playing w/ 4 players? zebraman Basketball 3 Sun Nov 19, 2006 09:20am
playing with 4 Nevadaref Basketball 11 Fri Nov 15, 2002 09:26am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:49am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1