NFHS - Umpire Responsible for Clearing bat

[BretMan]

Do you have any record of any umpire, anywhere, ever getting sued for not moving a bat?

Not to say it isn't possible- anything's possible. But in all of the millions of games that have been played over the years, if this was a likelihood you'd think that there might be at least one example of it having happened.

Just saying, "You might get sued", might have a little more credence if there was some probability or precedence attached to it.

[Scooby]

I am not touching the bat either. In my mind the on deck batter has the same amount of time and a lot less to do. If a coach wants a bat moved have the on deck batter do it.

[NCASAUmp]

I agree, don't touch the bat. Start doing that, and the next logical conclusion is chalking the lines yourself after every batter.

[DeputyUICHousto]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

Do what your association/UIC tell you to do. Then you can at least blame them. I am wondering if they are willing to put into writing that you cannot remove a bat.

There is a clear history of not allowing removal of the bat. I will not debate that.

The standard by which to judge negligence (which would be the basis of any lawsuit in this type of situation) is whether the umpire acted as a reasonably prudent person.

Would a reasonably prudent person remove the bat if he/she could do so safely, carefully and cautiously?

Or would a reasonably prudent person leave a bat in front of home plate knowing that there is a significant chance that the runner will slide into it and possibly get entangled with the catcher?

While some may argue that someone may trip over the bat if the umpire moves it, I think that the chances of that and the result of the potential trip would be much less than the runner sliding into the bat.

Nothing will stop an umpire from getting sued anyway.

If this the case, then the catcher and the on deck batter fall under the same "rules" regarding negligence. Are they not "prudent people"? Its unfortunate that our game has become such a litigious nightmare. Its a bat ball sport. Its also a non-contact contact sport. Occasionaly there is contact which can and does cause injury.

If the umpire picks up a discarded bat and tosses it towards the dugout and hits the on deck batter or a "bat boy" coming to retrieve the bat then he could be liable. If the umpire picks up the bat and so as not to injure anyone maintains possession of the bat then has to make a safe call at 3rd base, couldn't the bat slip from his hand and hit someone?

Just leave the damn bat alone! There are rules governing this very thing in the rule book.

[EsqUmp]

Originally Posted by DeputyUICHousto

If this the case, then the catcher and the on deck batter fall under the same "rules" regarding negligence. Are they not "prudent people"? Its unfortunate that our game has become such a litigious nightmare. Its a bat ball sport. Its also a non-contact contact sport. Occasionaly there is contact which can and does cause injury.

If the umpire picks up a discarded bat and tosses it towards the dugout and hits the on deck batter or a "bat boy" coming to retrieve the bat then he could be liable. If the umpire picks up the bat and so as not to injure anyone maintains possession of the bat then has to make a safe call at 3rd base, couldn't the bat slip from his hand and hit someone?

Just leave the damn bat alone! There are rules governing this very thing in the rule book.

1. I never said to toss the bat. Safely, carefully and cautiously removing the bat means that if there is time and the umpire won't interfere, the umpire can bend over, pick up the bat and drop it a few feet out of the way.

2. Bat boys are prohibited from entering the field during a live ball, especially if they are "boys." Remember the MLB play where a player's son came out onto the field during a live ball? Arguably, the umpire would be negligent if he allowed a bat boy to run onto the field if he could have prevented it. Obviously, that may not allows be possible because the umpires are responsible for other matters and the manager ought to be controlling his/her own dugout.

3. Umpires are in a different legal position than players or on-deck batters. Umpires owe a greater degree of safety to the participants than a catcher (particularly in amateur sports).

4. I never proposed running down to 3rd base with the bat. Again, that is not safely, carefully and cautiously removing the bat. That's running with a bat like an idiot.

5. You say, "There are rules governing this very thing in the rule book." What do you mean when you say "this very thing?" At best, there may be some general rules regarding discarded equipment that you can lump a bat into, but that doesn't appear to be very specific to me. Nor does it mention what an umpire should or should not do. I would appreciate a reference to a specific rule.

6. I don't shy away from a potentially effective/better mechanic just because there may be some umpire to doesn't follow it properly. Do you remember when in high school basketball they used to make the trail official hand the ball to the free-thrower and then run back into position? The associations were worried that the lead official may bounce the ball too hard and hurt the player. They thought that a rogue referee may fire the ball at the player. That sounds absurd now but it was a major concern for a while. The reality is that aside from good judgment, common sense and training, the lead official can still gun the ball (inappropriately) at the shooter. However, the basketball associations started to weigh the possibility of that happening over the benefit of letting the lead official bounce the ball. We all know that the lead can bounce the ball. So while I understand the concern that there may be a softball umpire who chooses to unsafely and carelessly hum the bat into the dugout or run up the 3rd base line and eject the bat has he/she calls the runner out at 3rd base, if that umpire is going to do things like that then I'm sure he/she is doing other things that may warrant him/her not being on the field in the first place.

[MNBlue]

You don't know what is going to happen next. If you move it a few feet out of the way, how do you know that a bad throw won't bring F2 a few feet out of the way right where you put the bat.

The offense discarded the bat. It is part of the field. If the defense wants it moved, they can move it. If the offense wants it moved, they can move it. If the umpire moves it, Murphy's Law says it will cause an unintended problem and the umpire will either get chewed out or some other problem will result. The umpire has better things to do than doing something the offense or defense should be responsible for doing.

[CecilOne]

There are times that I am more concerned about the on-deck batter, bat shagger or a coach being in the way than a bat.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

There are times that I am more concerned about the on-deck batter, bat shagger or a coach being in the way than a bat.

Especially when they seem to appear out of nowhere because it is quite possible such a concern (which is quite valid) can be a distraction to the umpire and others.

[Skahtboi]

Just to add my whatever the going price is these days for an opinion, don't touch the bat, or any other player equipment.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Especially when they seem to appear out of nowhere because it is quite possible such a concern (which is quite valid) can be a distraction to the umpire and others.

Right, although I was thinking of literally being in the way, collisions, blocking the catcher's access, etc.

[EsqUmp]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Especially when they seem to appear out of nowhere because it is quite possible such a concern (which is quite valid) can be a distraction to the umpire and others.

If the bat is removed by the umpire then the on-batter wont appear there to remove the bat himself. It's gone already.

[RKBUmp]

And while you are moving a bat that is covered by the rules as being a part of the field, are you truly paying attention to the action on the field and looking for any infractions?

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

If the bat is removed by the umpire then the on-batter wont appear there to remove the bat himself. It's gone already.

Only if the umpire makes it disappear.

[EsqUmp]

Does anyone have anything in writing from ASA/NFHS/NCAA or any other association stating "Do not remove the bat?"

From the majority of the replies, I think we can agree that there is a liability issue, even if we can't agree which is a greater liability. Since there is such a great liability issue, I think that there must be something in writing.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

Does anyone have anything in writing from ASA/NFHS/NCAA or any other association stating "Do not remove the bat?"

From the majority of the replies, I think we can agree that there is a liability issue, even if we can't agree which is a greater liability. Since there is such a great liability issue, I think that there must be something in writing.

In writing, no. However, in numerous clinics and schools, we've been instructed by our State UIC to not touch the bat. That's good enough for me.