Could not believe I even heard this today. Daughters "minors" softball game, opposing teams batter enters box, with an earing on. Ump sends her to dugout to remove and calls a strike. I ask him bout it(I am a Varsity level baseball ump, and work Football with him). He sez,"Oh, I told em before game thats the way I do it". WOW! I ask our manager bout it, he tells me some of the umps will call the girls out. Bigger WOW! I've got the local supplemental rules as I work the youth league boys, all it sez is "no jewelry allowed". Could not believe this.....

See my frequent comment about OJT not being enough.

I can't speak for LL, but with ASA rules, the umpire in your game was within the rules, especially if he warned both team ahead of time about jewelry.

The batter has 10 sec from "batter up" (spoken or impled) to be in the box, ready to go. The rule is to prevent delay of the game. The team had been warned about jewelry. The batter showed up in the box wearing jewelry. She (or her coach) was unnecessarily delaying the game.

The ASA rule book gives the umpire the latitude to give warnings or call strikes in the situation of a batter not being ready. The ASA rules that apply here are ASA 3-6-F, 7-3-B, 7-3-C-EFFECT, and 7-4-J.

Having said all of that, however, in a "minors" (is that 10U or 12U?) game, I'd simply call time and have the jewlery removed, unless removal became a production.

Obviously a strike.....
 

I totally agree with the official's call to begin calling strikes.

If the official warned the teams before the game to not wear jewelry, then that was their first and last warning.

When the batter entered the batter's box, she was in violation of the rule of not wearing jewelry. When the umpire asked her to remove the jewelry, she was in the parameter of delay of game which to the umpire's discretion may begin calling strikes. As for calling an out, it is also to the umpire's discretion to call it such a way. When the batter is not in his/her batter's box and the official has said "Play" or point to the pitcher, the umpire will begin calling strikes even if the batter is not there.

I definitely agree with this official. He warned both teams before hand and was simply doing his job and following league rules as an umpire.

roger

I know Rog and this official are technically correct and they are enforcing the rules to call the strike.I just don't think its worth it to have the coach and all the parents in a uproar as soon as the game starts.Thats like starting a basketball game with a technical foul it never leads to smooth game.Our job is to ensure a fairly played seamless as possible game out there and I don't see where waiting a minute for a young girl to remove earring is a problem.I know that almost any pre-game warning we give is not listened to by anybody.My philosophy is if we can fix it without being unfair or hurting the game lets do it and punish the next time.Just my opinion.

Re: Obviously a strike.....
 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~`
Bull crap! Rules interps are acceptable, don't get me wrong here. I do not work softball. But how much of a ****house do you wanna create calling this?!! I've got 10 years of "no jewelry" rules, from 9's to PONY regionals, I have NEVER called a strike for player who delays a few seconds to get the jewelry off timely. Chicken**** call. Oh, I gotta go pick some boogers......

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~`
Dakota, 11-12's. BS call IMHO. It went against opposing team, I am wondering bout this. Delay in BB is very seldom called, jewelry should not be the cause....JMHO

I saw the subject line and just KNEW I was going to have at least two cents to add here.

To start, pre-game is for the confirmation and exchange of line-ups, to review the ground rules and a coin toss, if applicable. If there are special circumstances, equipment or rules, they to should be reviewed if not previously covered. Telling coaches that no jewelry is allowed is an instruction or direction, not a warning.

I do not believe an umpire should issue warnings to teams in the pre-game conference. Everyone, including myself, likes to quote the rule book, but is there a paragraph suggesting, permitting or instructing umpires to issue "official" preemptive warnings? Of course, there are a couple of you out there thinking, "Well, there isn't one telling us we can't!" and you would be correct. I do not believe we can infer meaning, intent or direction by omission. If we did that, no two umpires would call a game in the same manner.

In NFHS, there is no jewelry, period. However, since Tom raised ASA's rules above, I will address them. Rule 3.6.F gives the umpire the discretion for determining what is dangerous jewelry which allows for the direction to remove whatever the piece may be.

However, the other three are going to be hard to enforce because two insist on the batter being directed by the umpire to the box when in fact, the umpire just directed them out away from the box. The third is only in effect AFTER the batter has entered the box and the umpire has forbidden that to happen. Actually, the only "official" remedy an ASA umpire has is found in 5.4 (forfeit) and I believe that may be a bit extreme in the beginning. There is no doubt that calling strikes is usually a great method to inspire a team's desire to do things as directed, it just isn't worded in the rule book to cover this particular situation.

I would like to think I would handle it by escorting the batter to the manager and tell them, "Coach, your team was instructed that no jewelry will be permitted. Have this jewelry removed from this young lady or give me a subsitute. By the way, coach, since I have now given your team a warning, the next infraction may be an indication that you are failing to control you team which means there is no reason to keep you here. And any further infractions, I may have to declare a forfeit."

Now, I'm not saying I will remember this if it ever comes time to act in this manner :), but I'm pretty sure that will result in one of two things. The team will fall in line and there will be no more problems, or you may end up getting rid of the manager earlier than anticipatedhttp://www.mansun-nl.com/smilies/wavey.gif

Please note that I always used the word "may", not "will", "shall", "going to" or any other word/phrase with a locked-in definitive meaning which leaves you no wiggle room.

I'm not saying that umpires should start tossing people and forfeiting games. I'm just suggesting a friendlier way of handling the situation. Also, I am only talking about the scenerio set forth in this thread, no other situations.

JMHO,

Mike

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~
Mike, VERY well put! Your wording is gonna be printed and used!! I was at my Assc fearless leaders house this morning to pick up games check, we discussed this. True to ASA rule, invocitng the "delay ruling", ump was correct. He may call strike for delay, but, preventive officiating should prevail, or just some common sence. But THANK YOU for a very descriptive description......cheers....chris

First, at the end of my post, I explained how I would handle it. The rest was addressing the claim that the umpire was making up rules. He was not (assumping LL has similar rules to ASA regarding delay of game and jewelry).

He was, however, being a bit of a hard case about it. Why was not explained.

Perhaps his "preemptive warning" was not preemptive at all, but preventative. Perhaps he had seen players warming up wearing jewelry and so informed both coaches that the jewelry would have to go, and he would not delay the game to have it removed later - batters better not enter to box wearing jewelry; fielders better not enter the playing field wearing jewelry.

While hard case, that is understandable and within the rules. Why a coach would proceed to ignore such a warning is a mystery, too.

OK which is it? A BS call or making up rules? It is, as I explained, not how I would handle it, and a bit hard nosed. I call a lot of 12U rec ball, similar players and atmosphere, I imagine, to LL. I would not even consider jumping right to calling strikes in a case like this.

If, as I speculated above, the umpire was attempting to prevent delay / problems after having seen girls warm up wearing jewlery, then his annoyance is understandable. If both teams were reminded of the jewelry rule, but one chose to ignore the reminder, well, who is to blame for even having the girl enter the box still wearing jewelry?

Making this call in this situation, it seems to me, would cause more rukus than it would help the game move along - after all, the purpose of the no jewelry rule is safety, and the purpose of the 10 sec rule is stopping delay. Going right to the penalty in this situation is not good game management, IMO. None of that, however, means he was making up rules.

Baseball is a different game with different traditions regarding delay and different rules.

Delay???
 

Doesn't the "delay" rule require the ball to be put in play?

How can a "penalty strike" be called if time has been called to issue a jewelry warning?

Re: Delay???
 

No, it does not require the ball to be put in play.

Tom,

Please note my difference between direction and preemptive warning.

Okay, ladies, there will not be any jewelry allowed in today's game. Have all your players remove any visible jewelry.

versus

Okay, ladies, I don't allow any jewelry in my games. Consider this your first and only warning.


And, yes, I have heard umpires offer these types of warnings about numerous rules from throwing a bat, language, helmet-removal, jewelry to discussing a play.

I think preemptive warnings are poor umpiring and poorer game management. Issuing warnings (as opposed to reminders or directions) during pregame so you can penalize immediately ignores the rules that something must happen before the warning can be issued. It also makes the ruling a "ground rule" and so has less authenticity than a book rule, even if you don't supersede a book rule. It is also perceived as laziness or attempting to get ejections early and shorten the game.

It might be technically permissible, but calling strikes for delay in situations like this is outside the purpose and spirit of the delay rule and we are supposed to understand that. Actually, a player can be ejected for refusing an order after a no jewelry reminder is issued, but that is only to eliminate a stalemate, not to penalize a minor infraction which is being corrected.

As to "some of the umps will call the girls out", that's really ridiculous. Makes me wonder why the coaches haven't checked the rules and pointed them out to the umpires.

There are a couple of ways to approach this for LL:

1. In pre-game, the question is asked to the managers, are your players properly equiped and prepared to play today's game?

2. Clearly state there is no jewelry allowed other than for medical or religious reasons. Don't issue a warning but they should know they'll get a stern reminder if anyone is caught.

3. After the first offense play shall be suspended, the offending player shall remove the item and assuming it's done in 2 minutes or less (help from a manager to cut something off or whatever) the game moves on with no further penalty. Team warning is issued however.

4. Eject any subsequent offenders.

Minors to big league, there should be no questions about this.

I have too. I agree with Cecil - they make the umpire appear lazy and sets the game off on a confrontational tone.
Agree completely.
An excellent way to handle it. In a typical rec league 70 minute timed game, two minutes is pushing it, though.

I believe the above is the reality of the strike calling issue and negates the possibility, at least for ASA and NFHS.

I have always been taught that we should just say the player "can not play with jewelry" rather than "Have this jewelry removed"; because that is the rule and we are not authorized to tell anyone what they can wear when not playing. There is also some possibility of "injury" while removing the item, and we don't want to start any more nonsense lawsuits.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~
Tom, I indeed thought at the time he was making this up. Second year official, my kids been playing ball 5 years now. never seen, nor heard this before.Guess I could do this in baseball.F3 the other nite as I am in "A" position got a necklace on, I simply call time, have him remove it, puit in my pocket and return it after 3 outs. Simple, HUH?? WAIT, maybe I as the BU should award a ball to the batter???

LOL! http://www.stopstart.freeserve.co.uk/smilie/hoho.gif Now THAT would be making up rules! http://www.stopstart.freeserve.co.uk/smilie/thumbs.gif

anpump,
We don't usually allow managers during our pre-game. ;)
mick

I have always been taught that we should just say the player "can not play with jewelry" rather than "Have this jewelry removed"; because that is the rule and we are not authorized to tell anyone what they can wear when not playing. There is also some possibility of "injury" while removing the item, and we don't want to start any more nonsense lawsuits. [/QUOTE]

Semantically, you are probably correct. I guess I have encountered too many...ah...er...let's say folks who have stood there and waited for me to TELL them their options after noting that the player could not participate with jewelry on. However, I do not see the litigeous side as I offered the coach an option to removing the jewelry :)

anecdote
 

Had a catcher in front of me for a coupla innings and when she came up to bat (sans catcher's helmet) I saw 6 ear studs in her left ear.

"Time!"

Went to the bench and never played again because it was too much of a hassle to remove them. :cool:
mick

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!
Glad you took that the way it was meant! Cheers buddy and very much thanks for the info!

While we're on the topic, have had this happen a couple of times... Player shows up with tape covering her ear lobe, probably because there are earings under there. I let it go, since I didn't see any jewelry and I'm not going to ask a player to remove a bandage.

OTOH, if a player has earings and asks if she can just tape it over, the answer is no - since I've seen it, I know there is no injury, just a coverup. The earings have to be removed.

Is this the correct way to handle this?

Tom,
Three years ago, my ref/ump life became much simpler when I went with the 'zero tolerance' policy where the jewelry rules were clear.
I <u>do</u> ask, "What's under the tape?"

If any pretty ear gets disfigured because we allowed tape, we will not necessarily be forgiven for not attending to the rules.
mick
<HR>
OK, so what's the speed of dark?

Plate conference NFHS
 

When coaches verify to the umpire-in-chief that their players are
equipped in accordance with the rules, this shall also pertain to
jewerly, <b>but does not constitute a team warning.</b>

Case book 1.19 Sit. A.

glen

Not to be a smart-***, Mick, but it is really none of your business what is under the tape. Do you ask the players to open their mouth to check their tongue? Lift their shirt to check their navel or breast? Drop their....nevermind, you get the point.

Speaking ASA

The rule specifically states the jewelry must be exposed. It also states that only that jewelry which YOU deem dangerous must be removed.

With all due respect to those who live their lives in such a manner, on the ball field, I am not my brother's keeper. My concern lies with articles dangerous to others, not the ball player wearing them. If they are foolish enough to risk their own well-being, so be it. If a juvenille, shame on their parents/guardians and/or coaches.

I know some of you may believe this as heresy, but I'm quite comfortable with my stance.

Mike,
I don't look for anything. Tape covering jewelry is illegal. I see it. I call it.
When dealing with some of the teenage levels where jewelry is taboo, quite often the coaches have already told their players to "Remove it", but they leave the dirty work up to the ref/ump. ;)
mick

Mick,

If something is covered by anything, it is not exposed. Therefore, not subject to your inspection.

I understand what you are saying and I can appreciate your efforts to protect players from themselves.

However, you need to appreciate that I don't consider self-inflicted damage done by one's jewelry a priority. I have my own kids to worry about, I don't need to assume guardianship of another 30 at game time. That is why they have parents and a coaching staff. Ball, strike, illegal, fair, foul, safe and out, plus the 114 pages of rules are my priority during a game.

Mike,

A rare disagreement here http://www.mansun-nl.com/smilies/eek2.gif,
but I agree with Mick. I see tape on an ear, I always
ask what is under there.
FED is pretty clear on what is to be taped and what not.

glen

Not a problem.
 

Mike,
I don't inspect.
I only ask, "What's under the tape?"
If they say "Jewelry", it's gone.
No fuss.
No muss.
They know the rules. ;)
mick

Glen,

I've been quite specific to note that my responses are based on ASA.

ASA does not forbid jewelry unless the umpire considers it dangerous. One, I do not rule on what I cannot see and two, if the piece is small enough to be covered by tape, I will most likely question is danger to others.

Re: Not a problem.
 

And if they decline to answer?

Again, speaking ASA. From the 2003 ASA Umpire Clinic Guide:

JEWELRY (Rule 3, Section 6 F)

Exposed jewelry may not be worn by the players if deemed dangerous by the umpire. When a player refuses to remove the jewelry, after being requested to do so by the umpire, the player will not be allowed to play. If a player and the jewelry is removed, the player can re-enter under the re-entry. Jewelry that is out of sight (taped or under uniform or batting glove) does not have the be removed if not considered dangerous.

NOTE: Medical alert bracelets or necklaces are not considered jewelry, but if worn, they must be taped to the body so the medical information remains visible.

It seems that if a taped piece of jewelry was dangerous, that fact would be obvious without asking what is under the tape. Therefore, if you need to ask......

Mike,
When I work ASA fast pitch, (and I think you alluded to this) if the player is wearing it, it seems quite legal to me, also.
...And in those games, I don't even think about tape.
Take care.
mick

Re: Re: Not a problem.
 

Mike,
Obviousness isn't always the case.

Barrettes are illegal, so sometimes the players wear tape instead of the scrunchies or hair elastics that they forgot.
Rings are illegal, but tape or a bandaid can cover an owey.

And if they tell an untruth, I'm covered. ...Did my job.
mick

Re: Re: Re: Not a problem.
 

Mick,

Barrettes are not illegal. Rings are not illegal. What is an owey?

Re: Re: Re: Re: Not a problem.
 

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
[B]Mick,

Still speaking ASA.

Barrettes are not illegal. Rings are not illegal. What is an owey?



[Edited by IRISHMAFIA on Apr 28th, 2003 at 08:47 PM]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not a problem.
 

An Owey? That's like a booboo. ...An ouchy... in all leagues. :)

DANG, did I open up a can of worms! Preventive officiating is the deal here.I do not work softball, enjot the hell outa watching mine play! We took a 5-3 game to 7 last nite, ended up loosing, 6-4. Girls were *****ing bout the ump(he's my assignor, worked PONY BRONCO SERIES), I stepped in with the coaches and we had a discussion. All game long, I am " see ball, HIT ball" Hey, they did not wanna get the bat off thier shoulders. D was great, couldn't hit.....oh well... Thanks for comments.....