Active Community: Message List

9-10 yo Tournament Team eligibility

guest — Wed, 16 May 2012 14:33:47 GMT

Is a local league allowed to prohibit a 9yo from being eligible for the 9-10 Little League Tournament Team?

This league has a 9yo team that participates in the Special Games tournament (up through Sectionals) and is forcing all 9's to this team.

Thanks.

Re: Mandatory play/illegal substitution

guest — Sat, 25 Jun 2011 21:25:22 GMT

Rich-

It definitely was/is "the" tournament.

The UIC referred the protest to the "protest committee", aka the tournament director, who made the original decision about it being too late to protest. The protesting manager didn't accept that and a call was then made to the DA and he made the ruling that the players were ineligible to continue and would be replaced by an eligible sub.

Re: Mandatory play/illegal substitution

guest — Sat, 25 Jun 2011 21:29:36 GMT

Rich-

OK, I just re-read your last post and it seems you agree that the starter and sub should have been removed from the game.

Re: Mandatory play/illegal substitution

guest — Sat, 25 Jun 2011 21:11:30 GMT

Yes, definitely a W'Port T-Game.

Blue-

I assume that the umpire was tracking pitchers and catchers and expecting the scorekeeper to track subs/MP. The scorekeeper, obviusly, was not up to the task.

So, is the consensus that the final resolution was correct?

And, should there be any action taken against the offending Manager?

Mandatory play/illegal substitution

guest — Sat, 25 Jun 2011 05:32:03 GMT

Little League 11/12 district game. Here is what happened:

Visiting team with 13 players, starter bats in the 1st, plays defense bottom of 1st, bats again in top of 2nd (makes last out). Sub replaces starter and plays bottom of 2nd. The sub is announced to official scorekeeper, but goes unnoticed by the home team scorekeeper. Sub does not bat in top of 3rd. Starter is re-inserted and plays defense in bottom of 3rd (still unnoticed by home team). After bottom of 3rd is complete, home team questions offical scorekeeper about subs because they noticed a different starter (other than the one in question) had been replaced in the field for the bottom of 3rd. During conversation, visiting manager confirms the situation above stating that the sub had completed his 3 defensive outs and that he would put him back in to bat "later". Unquestionably, the sub did not complete his MP before the starter was re-inserted.

Home team protested, protest committee denied based on "it wasn't protested before the next pitch", manager appealed to DA, DA ruled that starter and sub would both be removed from the game and replaced by another eligible sub, manager accepted, and play continued.

Hope that is clear enough and here are my questions:

1. Is this a mandatory play violation or an illegal substitution?

2. Was the DA's ruling proper? If not, what should have been the ruling?

Re: Ineligible Pitcher Protest

guest — Mon, 04 Apr 2011 18:22:32 GMT

One more question if I may.

With the protested game being resumed from the point of protest, how does one go about "correcting" the official scorebook. I see the options as:

1. Erasing the previous, invalidated results (messy)

2. Recreating (copying) the game results to a new scoresheet up to the time of protest and making notes on the original that the protest was upheld and to refer to the new scoresheet. (a little tedious, but seems better)

Is there a "correct" way to handle this?

Thanks.

Re: Ineligible Pitcher Protest

guest — Sat, 02 Apr 2011 18:00:51 GMT

Update.

The protest was upheld and the game will be continued at a later date from the point of protest with these restrictions:

1. Both starting pitchers (both over 40 pitches) had been removed from the game and are ineligible to play pitcher or catcher in the continuation.

2. Both starting catchers (having caught in 4 innings) are ineligible to play pitcher.

3. Any player not at the original game is eligible to play in the continuation and will be added to the bottom of their respective batting order (no mention of MPR).

Thanks again for all replies, gentlemen.

Re: Ineligible Pitcher Protest

guest — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 18:31:42 GMT

Thanks, again all.

Lou - Is your opinion that you believe that the kid that was ineligible to pitch last night because he played catcher should be eligible to pitch in the continuation of the protested game that was only protested because he was ineligible? If so, the offending manager could benefit from putting an ineligible pitcher in knowing that the same kid would be eligible when the game is continued later (if not forced to forfeit). This could include a scenario where a pitcher did not have enough days of rest. In our case, the continuation will not be scheduled on a day when either of the teams play another game.

Rich - When I said you guys are my research, that was tongue in cheek and I should have added this . I really mean that I am looking for verification of research that I have already done. Trust me...I have looked into the questions that I ask at length. But I agree with your "teach a man to fish" proverb.

Lou - More details on the MPR. I am the home team batting with one out in the bottom of the 4th with my #6 batter at the plate and runners at 1B and 2B. The "late" player would bat in the 12th spot (we roster 12 kids each) and, while possible, I believe it would be unlikely for my team to take the lead before the 6th inning AND for my #12 hitter not to come to the plate. He would certainly get his defensive MPR.

Re: Ineligible Pitcher Protest

guest — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 15:04:06 GMT

Thanks to all of you for your replies.

Mike - Kerfuffle is right (I had to look it up). The league president's son is on the opposing team and the league UIC was on the field. I expect the "good old boy" network to be working against me having this protest upheld.

Rich - You guys are my "research".

Mark - Do you have any type of link or data to the last interpretation that you referenced in your response?

Lou - MPR for the player that was absent shouldn't be a problem as the protest was lodged during the 4th inning of a tie game. FYI - the missing player from my team was my best player.

On a similar note to question #1 above, if the protest is upheld and the game resumed at a later date, should/will my starting pitcher that threw 85 pitches during the original game be able to play catcher when the game resumes?

Also, I don't really want a forfeit...I want to resume the game and beat them on the field.

Thanks again to all of you. You are an invaluable resource.

Ineligible Pitcher Protest

guest — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 04:29:28 GMT

I manage a LL Major team and filed a protest tonight on the use of an ineligible pitcher. The kid in question played catcher until there was one out in the 4th inning (3 and 1/3 innings). The other manager called time, talked to the umpires, and moved the kid from catcher to SS. While the kids were changing positions, I talked to the field umpire and mentiond that the kid should not be eligible to pitch due to having played catcher in 4 innings. The other manager believed that the kid could pitch as long as he did not catch 4 complete innings and the umpires agreed with him. Later in the same inning, the kid was brought in to pitch and I immediately notified the plate umpire that I would play the game under protest. Notes were made in the official score book and we finished the game and ended up losing.

I believe that my protest is valid and should be upheld. Although, you never know since one of the umpires on the field tonight was our UIC.

My questions if the protest is upheld and the game is scheduled to be completed at a later date:

1. Would the kid who was ineligible to pitch beause he had caught too many innings during the original game be allowed to pitch during the completion of the game since he will not have played the position of catcher on that makeup day?

2. If a kid was not at the original game (sick, etc.) but is at the re-scheduled completion of the game, would he be allowed to play by inserting him at the bottom of the lineup (we use CBO)?

Thanks for any feedback.