Skip navigation

16780 Views 106 Replies Latest reply: Nov 29, 2011 8:59 PM by callblue RSS Go to original post 1 2 3 4 5 ... 8 Previous Next
  • Frank_B Legend 1,324 posts since
    May 30, 2007

    Sanctions against a manager, a warning and/or ejection--[not the team itself]  Not specifficaly written with the intention to prevent a double play, but for any/all other reason(s)---including, of course, to prevent a double play. All of which are  not spelled out in LL print.   An umpire's judgment call!!  Find that in the RIM----not the rulebook.

     

    Nothing to change in the rulebook, unless of course, the RIM (penalty) wording on the subject is suggested to be added to Rule 7.13.

     

    Frank!

  • HugoTafurst Legend 515 posts since
    May 25, 2007

    Kyle_ wrote:

     

    "If umpire is struck by a batted ball while on the infield grass...He is part of the field and ball is live unless the ball gets stuck in his uniform."

     

    That's the way the rule is now, sort of.

     

     

     

    DO NOT mess with 7.13. It is, by far, the most fun rule to enforce. I've hade two poof plays, but the bases loaded triple, where the BR gets thrown out at the plate is the best. Don't take the possibility of calling that again away from me. Just calling an out is boring. Pulling runners out of the dugout, putting them back on the bases, and having the parents go "what, what, WHAT!?" is awsome.

     

    Yeah, the AR is needed. Tossing kids for silly stuff, like accidental bat tossing, is stupid. There are a lot of instances where banning a kid from the next played game is too harsh. Ditto on the MC rule. We need an out here. Steamrolling a catcher needs to have a BIG penalty

     

    Although I really have no problem with the concept of 7:13 - if that's the way LL wants to deal with it, fine..... I can not let the comment: "It is, by far, the most fun rule to enforce." go without some comment.

     

    Kyle and I have gone back and forth about things like this before... By now, I know him and respect him as a dedicated LL umpire..

    BUT we have slightly different philosophies regarding the job of an umpire.

    So, take it for what it's worth...........

    We are out there to do a job, and that is to enforce the rules as decided by the rules makers -

    I have "fun" by doing my job well.... Reaction of players, coaches or spectaters has nothing to do with anything.

    Knowing that properly enforcing a rule will cause confusion, anger , wonderment, whatever is not part of the equation.

    Kind of makes me think of the "Umpire as the show" type of thing....

     

    OK it's off my chest.





    oops

  • Rich_Ives Legend 1,283 posts since
    May 25, 2007

    Why was the enforcement ignored?  FIx it!

  • Manny_A Legend 841 posts since
    May 25, 2007

    Since someone already mentioned Administrative Removal (which I've advocated for years now), I won't bother.

     

    I would like to see the SPR rule get converted to a true Courtesy Runner rule.  Allow CRs for the catcher and pitcher only, so that they can get ready for the next defensive half-inning.  This will speed things up a little.

     

    For the life of me, I never could understand why LL had this SPR thing.  I think LL is the only organization that has it.  It really serves no useful purpose, in my mind.  And it can't be used under the Continuous Batting Order format, which means SPRs are nonexistent in LL Minors, and at higher levels where the local league opts to use CBO.  So why bother having an option that cannot be exercised in most divisions of LL?

     

    OTOH, a true Courtesy Runner is an option that speeds things up (something that is desperately needed in Minors!).  It is used in many other baseball and softball organizations, even at the high school level.  Under CBO, a CR for the pitcher or catcher would be the previous batter in the order who is not on base.

     

    If someone can convince me that CRs are worse than SPRs, I may change my tune.

  • Frank_B Legend 1,324 posts since
    May 30, 2007

    If memory serves, the SPR, as explained by W'port at the time---was implemented to allow a bench-sitter to get (more) involved in the game.

    Yes, same could be said for a "courtesy runner.

     

    .........Manny wrote:  "a true courtesy runner is an option that speeds things up."

     

    But somewhat negated by the fact a time-out must be requested and granted-----as, of course, with a SPR.

    And if unlimited ones are allowed, as opposed to once an inning for LL SPR's......game "speed-ups" suffer!

     

    I do see the benefit re speed-up---when used for a pitcher or catcher.

     

    SPR's, with limitations and restrictions as they are.....I have no problem with. Still a manager's choice to use or not.

     

    As for CBO's----all players present are in the game offensively; so if my first sentence (above) is true, W'port's reason for the SPR has been fulfilled.

     

    I don't believe CR's are allowed in Cal Ripken/Babe Ruth/OBR----not sure about other orgs.

     

    All in all, personally, I would have no problem with LL's use of either one......other than, if CR, there are limitations and restrictions employed.

    Then, I guess, by any name, there would be no difference between the two other than use of a CR with CBO's.....as Manny described.

     

     

    P.S.

    Great OP subject NELL----as evidenced by the  number of responders----and their replies!

    [with most of us east-coasters hunkered-down from the effects of "Irene"]

     

    Frank!

  • HugoTafurst Legend 515 posts since
    May 25, 2007

    NELL_blue wrote:

     

    I hope you feel better!! Much easier to breath now.

     

    So, the rule makers that you mention, would they not like to know how many practicing umpires feel about the rules they write for us to follow?

    I have many rules at my job that I have to follow, some people blindly follow and others like to know why some rules exist.

     

    Isn't there one rule that you would change if you were the only rule maker?

     

    My comment was soley addressing Kyle's remark that the rule should be left as is because it is "FUN" to enforce, and the implication that it is FUN to enforce because of the reaction from confused players, coaches and fans.

    It is the motivation stated - the ability to make a call that says "I know more than you" which borders on "the game is about me" that I object to.....

     

    Read this statement:

    "It is, by far, the most fun rule to enforce. I've hade two poof plays, but the bases loaded triple, where the BR gets thrown out at the plate is the best. Don't take the possibility of calling that again away from me. Just calling an out is boring. Pulling runners out of the dugout, putting them back on the bases, and having the parents go "what, what, WHAT!?" is awsome."

     

     

    I know Kyle is dedicated to youth ball, etc, but a statement like that can NOT go unchallenge on a board dedicated to serious umpiring..

    There was no modification or indication that the statement was tounge in cheek.... fine, I do that many times (as you know)..... but I put in my comment to give others perspective...

     

    I have nothing against suggestions for rule changes - but I have to admit, I don't spend a lot of time thinking about changes....





    oops

  • Kyle_ Legend 556 posts since
    May 25, 2007

    No worries, Hugo. I can see where that can be seen as trying to soak up some spotlight in the field.

     

    Naw, I'm pretty casual in my approach to enforcement. No bellowing calls, etc. On the poof plays, I just say to the scorekeeper that run doesn't count, and to put 7.13 in the book. Then I just go over to the O manager and quickly explain it. No showboating on my part. On putting guys back on bases, I just explain it to the manager, and let him put the guys back out. I'm pretty low key on the field, trust me.

     

    The "fun" is actually knowing this intricate rule, and being able to apply it. That's the rule geek in me, I guess.

  • Mike_CVUA Legend 593 posts since
    May 25, 2007

    NELL:

     

    Let me guess.  You last name is "di Pinto di Blue!"

     

    Volare, my man! 

     

    Mike CVUA

  • Frank_B Legend 1,324 posts since
    May 30, 2007

    Hey Easy Ed:

     

    Your "man-up"  post has me convinced you are blood-related to beowulf. 

     

    Frank!

  • Frank_B Legend 1,324 posts since
    May 30, 2007

    NELL:  Your picture looks  to be a Norman Rockwell, "Saturday Evening Post" cover from the 1940's.  

     

    Right? Wrong?

     

    Frank!

  • Frank_B Legend 1,324 posts since
    May 30, 2007

    Oh yes, also remember the bat for choosing sandlot games players.

     

    First, the bat was thrown from one "captain" to the other.

    The "hand over hand" to the nub of the bat for 1st choice of available players started from where the other "captain" caught the bat.

     

    Back in the late 30's, "Great Depression" years,  if we didn't have a real baseball--[usually battered and tattered]--we collectecd pennies, adding up to 5-cents, to buy what we called a "nickel-brick" at the local neighborhood grocery store.

     

    That "ball" consisted of sawdust or wood shavings, held together by heavy tape.

    Lucky if one lasted for the entire game. Home runs non-existant. Bases were usually landmarks, tree, bush, sewer cover. etc., or piece of cardboard held down by a stone.

     

    "Depression"--- or not, great years for us kids and friendships. Not so great for parents, adults, looking to provide for us kids. Us kids didn't know any better---we were clothed and fed. Everybody was in the same "boat"----so we kids didn't know things were "bad."

    Many real big families those days.

     

    Family on next street over had sixteen(16) kids! 

    Mother of same went to Mass every morning!

     

    Frank!

1 2 3 4 5 ... 8 Previous Next

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...