From another forum, coach putting spit on ball

[topper]

Originally Posted by topper
They indeed do - before the game.

Are you saying you would allow a coach to put anything on the ball between innings based on what's done prior to the game? Where do you draw the line? Most importantly, please cite the supporting rule as well.

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Is that what I said and, BTW, the coach didn't put anything on the ball, did he?

BTW, YOU cite the rule forbidding the coach from doing what was described in the OP.

No, but it is implied. I'll re-word my question: Would you allow a coach to put anything on their hands and then rub up the ball between innings?

As for citing the rule, college rules don't exclude non-playing personel from their wording while ASA does allow for ruling on issues not specifically covered in the rules. Dave's solution works for me.

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Don't know, would you?

Even if you thought you were, I believe this to be over-officiating at its extreme. This is one of those things that some umpire gets talked into enforcing by a coach because "rules are rules" and we end up with another ridiculous thread about TWPs.

Think about it. A coach moistens HIS HANDS (not the ball), picks up a ball and rubs it down, hands the ball to the pitcher who then throws five warm-up pitches to the catcher who is now handling the ball with her glove and throwing hand as many times as their are pitches, then throws the ball to F4 who throws the ball to F6 who throws the ball to F....well, you get the point.

So, after this ball has been thrown and caught in a glove 13 times, just what is going to happen on the first pitch that was effected by the coach spitting on his/her hands?

Oh, here it comes........EVEN IF the pitcher threw no warm-up pitches, the coach's actions would still would not affect the pitch.

Go ahead, make that call. What you do with the boogers you find is your business. I know it will not be mine.

I'm not looking to be an OOO or pick a booger on the field. I'm just trying to get clear on how ASA would want the sitch in the OP handled should it arise and, understand the correct application/interpretation of 6.6.A.
If ASA sees it as non issue or a violation, then it's not a booger I'll pick if I happened to see a DC doing it. If an OC should observe it and complain about the DC I now know what to tell him.

[MD Longhorn]

I still question why you would WANT to make a point of calling this?

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

I still question why you would WANT to make a point of calling this?

Wanting to do something and having to do something do not necessarily go hand-in-hand.

What if the coach actually does put something besides spit on the ball? Are we going to stick with the technicality of "this rule only applies to players, not coaches?"

Either the spit is a foreign substance or it isn't.

[topper]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

I still question why you would WANT to make a point of calling this?

Because it's an IP in college and a coach putting a foreign substance on the ball at other levels needs to be addressed.

[MD Longhorn]

I'm wondering about the want. There is no have. You don't HAVE to rule this illegal, because it's not.

But 2 or 3 of you obviously WANT to - either by warping one rule improperly to fit what you want into it,or by using the God rule unnecessarily. My question is... "Why?"

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by topper

Because it's an IP in college

Irrelevant.

and a coach putting a foreign substance on the ball at other levels needs to be addressed.

I'll say it again... WHY?

[topper]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Irrelevant.

What in the OP makes it irrelevant? It doesn't mention the level of ball.

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

I'll say it again... WHY?

Where to you draw the line Mike? (either Mike BTW) If not spit then what would make you address it and what rule would you cite then?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by topper

No, but it is implied. I'll re-word my question: Would you allow a coach to put anything on their hands and then rub up the ball between innings?

As for citing the rule, college rules don't exclude non-playing personel from their wording while ASA does allow for ruling on issues not specifically covered in the rules. Dave's solution works for me.

Not so. ASA specifically notes who (a defensive player) many not apply a "foreign substance" to the ball. Therefore, the god rule does not apply.

And, again, I did not say anything, I specifically addressed the situation offered in the OP.

But even if you want to stop the coach, the book does not give you an avenue to use the foreign substance rule. Want to dump him for USC, knock yourself out. However, once the pitcher has possession of the ball, now you have a violation.

Think about it. In ASA, when a coach screams an appeal from the dugout, do you not wait until a fielder repeats it or presents you with the appeal?

[darkside]

You have nothing. You cannot call this or make up a call just because you don't like it. We are here to enforce the rules as written, not make them up to our liking. If you don't like the wording, put in a change. Personally, I don't see an epidemic of coaches doing this to require a rule change. I could also care less if they spit on the ball and rubbed it in. Doing this will not change the movement of the ball.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by darkside

You have nothing. You cannot call this or make up a call just because you don't like it. We are here to enforce the rules as written, not make them up to our liking. If you don't like the wording, put in a change. Personally, I don't see an epidemic of coaches doing this to require a rule change. I could also care less if they spit on the ball and rubbed it in. Doing this will not change the movement of the ball.

No problem with what you say. BUT, if you allow the coach to do it, you can be sure a player will at some time, and you would be required to enforce that penalty.

NCASA stated my position. First time I see it, I change out the ball, and tell the coach he cannot do that (apply a foreign substance) to the ball. Rub it up, fine; the spit or dirt, only an umpire may do.

If he repeats, it isn't a G-d rule; he may not do what you specifically directed him not to do. And, before you ask, yes, you may direct anything you deem to be in the spirit (and intent) of the rules.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by darkside

I could also care less if they spit on the ball

Really? How much less?

[topper]

For the 3rd time I ask those who think we have nothing:

What substance would you not allow the coach in the OP to put on his hands and then rub up the ball? Motor oil? Hair spray? Tape? Resin? Non-Delaware mud? And if you find a substance that you won't allow, what rule will you cite then?

Why is it that none of you will attempt to answer this?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by topper

For the 3rd time I ask those who think we have nothing:

What substance would you not allow the coach in the OP to put on his hands and then rub up the ball? Motor oil? Hair spray? Tape? Resin? Non-Delaware mud? And if you find a substance that you won't allow, what rule will you cite then?

Why is it that none of you will attempt to answer this?

That's Delaware River mud and is believed to come from a tributary in NJ

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

No problem with what you say. BUT, if you allow the coach to do it, you can be sure a player will at some time, and you would be required to enforce that penalty.

NCASA stated my position. First time I see it, I change out the ball, and tell the coach he cannot do that (apply a foreign substance) to the ball. Rub it up, fine; the spit or dirt, only an umpire may do.

If he repeats, it isn't a G-d rule; he may not do what you specifically directed him not to do. And, before you ask, yes, you may direct anything you deem to be in the spirit (and intent) of the rules.

Bingo! Best answer yet.
Covers everything in the OP, shows good game management, works around the issue that ASA 6.6.A. makes no mention of other team personnel.