How far is "too far?"

[NCASAUmp]

So on another forum, guys frequently ask about fixing their bats. End caps come off (Mizunos are notorious for that), rivets come out, and so on.

Some guys say it's perfectly fine to push the rivets back in. Some say it's fine to glue the end cap back on. I had one guy ask if he could pound the end cap back into place when it had gapped slightly (about 3mm).

So where do you draw the line between normal "fixing" of a bat and "altering?"

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

So on another forum, guys frequently ask about fixing their bats. End caps come off (Mizunos are notorious for that), rivets come out, and so on.

Some guys say it's perfectly fine to push the rivets back in. Some say it's fine to glue the end cap back on. I had one guy ask if he could pound the end cap back into place when it had gapped slightly (about 3mm).

So where do you draw the line between normal "fixing" of a bat and "altering?"

The rivet issue should disappear at many of those bats are leaving the market. Replacing the cap is shouldn't be necessary as it had to come off somehow. Manufacturers state that it shouldn't happen, so.....

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

The rivet issue should disappear at many of those bats are leaving the market. Replacing the cap is shouldn't be necessary as it had to come off somehow. Manufacturers state that it shouldn't happen, so.....

I agree the end caps shouldn't come off, but they do. Just about every used Mizuno I've laid my hands on seems to have some amount of separation of the end cap from the barrel, and I have no reason to suspect whatsoever that these particular players are working the caps off.

I've always felt that once the cap comes off, the bat is done unless the repairs are done by the manufacturer only. But if some umpires allow players to knock the rivets back into place, how would that be consistent with prohibiting players from glueing their end caps back into place?

Or would this be a topic better left off the public radar?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

I agree the end caps shouldn't come off, but they do. Just about every used Mizuno I've laid my hands on seems to have some amount of separation of the end cap from the barrel, and I have no reason to suspect whatsoever that these particular players are working the caps off.

I've always felt that once the cap comes off, the bat is done unless the repairs are done by the manufacturer only. But if some umpires allow players to knock the rivets back into place, how would that be consistent with prohibiting players from glueing their end caps back into place?

Or would this be a topic better left off the public radar?

Cite 3.1.G. This rule is clear that if the manufacturer is not the one who removed the cap, the cap was not properly affixed which, since the manufacturer has agreed through certification that a cap cannot come off, would default to the point that someone other than the manufacturer removed or caused the cap to come off. That, by rule, DQs the bat and clearly suggests there has been an attempt to alter the bat.

If the player has a problem, it is with the manufacturer, or the person who screwed with their bat, not the sanctioning body with whose rules to which the manufacturer agreed to abide.

How about that for some serious, yet effective and factual, rhetoric?

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Cite 3.1.G. This rule is clear that if the manufacturer is not the one who removed the cap, the cap was not properly affixed which, since the manufacturer has agreed through certification that a cap cannot come off, would default to the point that someone other than the manufacturer removed or caused the cap to come off. That, by rule, DQs the bat and clearly suggests there has been an attempt to alter the bat.

If the player has a problem, it is with the manufacturer, or the person who screwed with their bat, not the sanctioning body with whose rules to which the manufacturer agreed to abide.

How about that for some serious, yet effective and factual, rhetoric?

I agree completely with your interpretation of the rule regarding a cap that has come off. It's done, kaput, finished.

What about a cap that hasn't come off? One that appears to be slowly working its way out of the barrel, does not appear to be tampered with, but still appears secure? Would a player be allowed to tamp it back into place (not that we'd ever know, but if I'm asked...)?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

I agree completely with your interpretation of the rule regarding a cap that has come off. It's done, kaput, finished.

What about a cap that hasn't come off? One that appears to be slowly working its way out of the barrel, does not appear to be tampered with, but still appears secure? Would a player be allowed to tamp it back into place (not that we'd ever know, but if I'm asked...)?

How can it appear to be working it's way out and still appear secure?

As noted in the rules, the end cap must be securely in place so that the end cap can only be removed by the manfacturer without being destroyed.

Unless the guy who was swinging the bat owns the company that produced that bat, any appearance that the cap is not exactly where it was when it left the factory is not good to go.

[jr131981]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Cite 3.1.G. This rule is clear that if the manufacturer is not the one who removed the cap, the cap was not properly affixed which, since the manufacturer has agreed through certification that a cap cannot come off, would default to the point that someone other than the manufacturer removed or caused the cap to come off. That, by rule, DQs the bat and clearly suggests there has been an attempt to alter the bat.

If the player has a problem, it is with the manufacturer, or the person who screwed with their bat, not the sanctioning body with whose rules to which the manufacturer agreed to abide.

How about that for some serious, yet effective and factual, rhetoric?

umm, this wouldnt be the first time that a corporation has claimed their product would/wouldnt do XXXXX and they were wrong/lying.

i actually had a J2 (demarini juggernaut 2) end cap come off a month ago. i grabbed the bat, made sure it wasnt shaved, looked at the end cap to see if it had been messed with (most notably "pry marks"). nothing was wrong with the bat, but i told the team the bat had to be removed from the game.

on a side note, while i wish bat manufacturers would just make an endcap that can be taken off in 1s so anyone can check to see if the bats shaved, i will give some credit for the new utrip rules which have some sort of cap over the endcap to make it damn near impossible to take off.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by jr131981

umm, this wouldnt be the first time that a corporation has claimed their product would/wouldnt do XXXXX and they were wrong/lying.

That's fine, but it isn't the umpire's problem. That is purely a issue between the consumer and manufacturer.

i actually had a J2 (demarini juggernaut 2) end cap come off a month ago. i grabbed the bat, made sure it wasnt shaved, looked at the end cap to see if it had been messed with (most notably "pry marks"). nothing was wrong with the bat, but i told the team the bat had to be removed from the game.

What were you going to do if you found evidence there was an issue with the bat?

on a side note, while i wish bat manufacturers would just make an endcap that can be taken off in 1s so anyone can check to see if the bats shaved,

Why would you care? Do you know how many times you would be asked to check this bat or that? I'm there to umpire a ball game, not be a hall monitor for bats.

i will give some credit for the new utrip rules which have some sort of cap over the endcap to make it damn near impossible to take off.

A cap for a cap? If they cannot/do not make one secure, what makes you think the second will be?

If you really want to alleviate the situation, get rid of the end cap, period. Make them find a way to produce a bat that doesn't need and end cap.