|
|||
2006 NCAA rule interpretations from:
|
|||
| Note: NCAA will host and maintain a Softball Rules Interpretation web site in 2006. When that page is up and running, interpretations will no longer be posted here. Instead, you will be directed to the NCAA site. | |||
| 5-11-06 | |||
| Question | Runner on 3rd base. Batter receives a base on balls. Ball immediately goes back to the pitcher in the circle. Batter runner crosses 1st base and continues down the right field line, makes an arc deep into right field and continues her arc towards 2nd base (envision the McDonald's arch). A bit confused, the pitcher cocks her arm in a obvious attempt at a play on the batter-runner at which time, the funner on 3rd base releases off the base. Now the pitcher brings her arm back down to her side so that she is no longer making a play. Question: Is the look back rule back in effect now and does the runner on 3rd now have to immediately make a decision to return to 3rd or advance to home? Does the batter runner have to continue to 2nd if she is still headed in that direction after the pitcher is no longer making a play and she has taken several steps in that direction or is she allowed one stop even though the pitcher is no longer making a play on her. |
||
| Answer | Once the pitcher makes a play, both runners are released from the restrictions of the look back rule so both can leave their base and advance or leave their base, stop to locate the ball and choose their direction. It is not a time related play (ie the runner is free only during the time the pitcher is making a play); it is an all or nothing (ie the pitcher makes a play, the runners are released...pitcher makes no play, the runners are restricted). The fact that the pitcher started to make a play and changed her mind (and stopped) does not shorten the amount of time the runners have to advance or return. | ||
| 4-27-06 | |||
| Question | Has there been any discussion on removing the "intentionally" on the prohibiting seeing the release of the pitch. The 1B players are getting pretty good at being in the way without ever looking over their shoulder, hence being non-intentional, but this is still prohibiting the runner from seeing the release. Give me your insight please. | ||
| Answer | Either the runner should ask the defensive player to move or the umpire can (if she notices the runner having difficulty positioning herself on the base and able to see). As soon as she is alerted, she should comply nad if it continues, then you have grounds for assuming this is intentional. The reason we chose to leave "intentional" in is that the runner can "draw the violation" by positioning herself behind the fielder and then innocently claim not to see. | ||
| 4-27-06 | |||
| Question | If the 1st offense/warning on a defensive player is issued for "intentionally prohibiting seeing the release of the pitch" and then the same individual commits the "Rounding/Returning" obstruction . . .is the penalty of a next base award given? or are each of these occurences treated separately? | ||
| Answer | They are treated separately so she would get a warning for her positioning and then one for rounding/returning. | ||
| 4-27-06 | |||
| Question | A team started with 10 players, DP for the Flex (pitcher #24). In the 2nd, the pitcher got in trouble and the team dropped to 9 with the DP now becoming the pitcher and hitter. They tied the score in the 5th and brought in a sub (new pitcher #21) into the 10th position, and the original DP assumed the DP role again. A substitute was also made for the catcher. The plate umpire made a mistake and reported 24 back in the game instead of 21 coming in. The opposing coach an inning later, wanted 24 DQ’d; or ejected or something; anyhow, the home plate umpire stood his ground and said the opposing coach had reported correctly and he in fact had made the mistake. She protested the game on an illegal re-entry. In review the game report and rules, I do not feel it was an illegal re-entry as no one re-entered. The HP umpire states he made the mistake; the home book had the correct info, it appears it was announced correctly although no one is positive on this one. I do not feel the coach has a valid protest. |
||
| Answer | As long as #21 was a legal substitute and the mistake was by the umpire, you are right that it is correctable. Since the opposing coach protested on the grounds of an illegal reentry and no one reentered, it would be denied even if he/she went through the process. | ||
| 4-27-06 | |||
| Question | Last half of the 7th ending score tied and a runner of 1st with one out. A sharp ground ball to third, the third baseman makes a good play and gets the force at second. The ball is thrown back to the pitcher and the batter who made it to first is on first base with the ball in the circle. The pitcher decides to run to the third baseman to give her a high five for a good play, the runner on first takes off and runs to second base and makes it safely. The defensive coach maintained that the runner could not leave first base after going to the base with the ball in the circle. He protested the game at that point. Highlight, on the next pitch the batter hit a bashit and the runner from second scored. GAME OVER. Could you send me a ruling so that I can send this to the coaches and the commisioner. |
||
| Answer | If the pitcher carries the ball out of the circle, the lookback rule is not in effect and runners are free to advance (with liability to be put out, of course). I bet the defensive team will not make that mistake again! |
||
| 4-19-06 | |||
| Question | If a bat that is not listed on the non-approved bat list (and is legal in every other way - no chips, dents, or burrs) has its ASA certification worn off so that it cannot be read, does that make the bat illegal? | ||
| Answer | The ASA certification mark must be visible for the bat to be legal. | ||
| 4-14-06 | |||
| Question | 1. Is using the player’s name during heckling by a fan(s) illegal? Ex.- “Come on Katie- throw another meat ball”! What about – “great job catcher/Joni, you’re the most porous backstop I’ve ever seen”… What about screaming the player’s name at the top of one’s lungs? Ex- a 10 second “Kelleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee”, whether she’s batting or playing defense? What about a Coach? Ex.- “get in the coach’s box Dave”! The Rules book has the pre-game verbiage that is read- no where does it state that names cannot be used. The comments cannot be sexist, racist, etc… 2. What about a fan using a 12” plastic megaphone or a rolled up game program with any of the above examples? They aren’t noise makers (artificial); they’re noise ‘enhancers’ according to an “administrator”. At what point does this become an umpire issue vs an administration issue?? We can’t have rabbit ears on the field, but at the same time, we can’t police every heckle in the stands either… We want more fans at games, we want more exposure, we want more TV coverage, but when does heckling truly become obnoxious instead of “fun”, and whose job is it to determine this? The days of “old money” donors who sit on their hands in the stands are over. Is it time to start defining what is acceptable and what isn’t? Sportsmanship is a major concern and in the Points of Emphasis this year and I’m having coaches calling and asking me… |
||
| Answer | I think we are just a small part of the epidemic of poor sporting behavior by fans. Professional sports, other collegiate sports and even recreational games are seeing more and more bad behavior in the stands. But most of what you wrote is not a rule book issue but a local campus issue. What each administration is willing to tolerate (some church related schools might have a higher expectation or standard for their fans) varies considerably. And of course, we're all trying to attract more fans to our venues and add to the competitive experience so ejecting fans or curtailing their perceived "fun" will impact their potential return. So my suggestion is if the fans are a problem for the umpire or opposing team, involve the on-site administrator and allow them to judge their compliance with rule 4, section 9b (Ensure the existence of proper sporting conditions and behavior of spectators throughout competition.) If the administrator's judgement is that the behavior is appropriate but the opposing coach or umpires disagree, you have two options...if it is a conference game, concern can be expressed to the appropriate conference personnel; if it is non-conference, the team can choose to drop the school from future schedules. Those are all post event solutions but in real time, it is the on-site administrator whose judgement determines if the behavior is acceptable. As to the next issue, thundersticks, plastic megaphones and "clappers" are definitely in vogue...for all the reasons you mention...and again add to the atmosphere of the games (sometimes positive, sometimes negative). Hopefully though the on-site administrator will use their judgement in determining where to draw the line as to what is acceptable on their campus. It is challenging to allow the language and actions of the student spectators and the more conservative desires of our senior citizens or family groups who are getting involved in our sporting events....even whether the students in the front rows can stand the whole event and block the view of the patrons with seats behind them. |
||
| 4-10-06 | |||
| Question | A batted ball bounced over the fence. The first base umpire had gone out and correctly signaled for dead ball when the ball left the field. The batter-runner was incorrectly awarded third base. The offensive team substituted for the runner at third. Then the base award error was corrected and the batter-runner was put back at second base on the ground rule double. Now the offensive coach did not want the substitution. Because the batter runner was initially put on the incorrect base, then later corrected I did not feel that a player's entry into the game should be put in jeopardy and did not keep the sub recorded. At this point the visiting coach protested the game. I am familiar with the substitution rule and realize I did not apply it correctly. At the time I felt it was common sense to not put a player in jeopardy as a result of a correctable error on the part of the umpires. |
||
| Answer | I do believe you did the right thing. The substitution was based on the coach thinking the substitute was going to be on third, not second. AND that belief was based on information from the umpire (awarding her third on a ground rule double) so that is correctable. We had a similar circumstance with a batter who was awarded first on a base on balls. The offensive coach made an immediate substitution for the now runner at first with the plate umpire. At the same time, the defensive coach came out of the dugout and talked to the first base umpire, asking for a checked swing on the last pitch. The base umpire discussed with the coach the proper appeal process would be to the plate so coach waited until the plate umpire was free and asked for an appeal. The plate umpire asked for the appeal and the first base umpire called it a swing. Now the count is 3-1. In this case, the umpires allowed the coach to rescind her substitution of the "pinch runner" and allow the original batter to return to the batter's box to complete her turn at bat. |
||
| 4-7-06 | |||
| Question | We had some rainfall during a game and one of the teams wanted their pitcher to use a "gripping" product called "mighty grip." The pitcher already had a towel (tucked behind her) and a rosin bag in her back pocket. The product "mighty grip" didn't ring a bell to the umpiring crew as to being a legal product for use during a softball game. The umpiring crew knew that the power rosin and a "gold (something)..." products were legal and that "rock" rosin was not legal. However, none of the crew had ever heard of "mighty grip." So, I guess my question is: Is "mighty grip" a legal product for pitchers (or any other players) to use? This product was in a little plastic bottle. The crew's consensus was "no." They didn't think it to be legal. Therefore, didn't allow the "mighty grip" to be used. |
||
| Answer | Actually Mighty Grip is one of the products that is often used but it isn't possible for us to go to print with the book in July and know all the products that will be used on the field the next spring so we do not include any brand names. So if there's a product you are not familiar with, ask the pitcher to apply it as she wants to use it in a game, then have her grip the ball and hand it to you. If there is transfer of product onto the ball, then you have a foreign substance that is not appropriate. If not, then the product would be okay. | ||
| 4-7-06 | |||
| Question | The pitcher was taking her sign from the catcher, and just dropped the ball before putting her hands together. The plate umpire awarded a ball to the batter. My question here is: Shouldn't this have been just a "live" ball with no penalty? The pitcher just dropped the ball before putting hands together or starting any pitching motion. | ||
| Answer | Yes, apply rule 10, section a...no penalty but runners may advance with liability to be put out since the pitcher no longer has possession of the ball in the circle. | ||
| 3-23-06 | |||
| Question | Pitcher's Glove. A pitcher has a white fielder's glove with blue webbing and red stitching. However, the book says the pitcher can only wear a glove with the colors black, brown, tan, or grey -- the stitching doesn't matter. Given the definition in the book, it seems clear to me that her glove is not legal for a pitcher. First, is it illegal? And if it is illegal, do the umpires make her change gloves when she's pitching or do we wait for someone to appeal illegal equipment? You could make a weak argument that the "white" is really "grey" (off-white). But there's no denying the webbing is blue (navy). It apparently is not distracting since no opponent has said anything. |
||
| Answer | The pitcher's glove is illegal in that it does not conform to the limited choice of color. The effect of 3-7 does include if the pitcher makes a play, it can be nullified so it definitely can have an effect on the game. Even though the coaches are responsible for legally equipping their team and should know the rules (after all, this is not new..changed in 2003 from the original rule of one color or two tints of the same color so this glove you described has never been legal in NCAA play), it would be best if you or I contacted them to alert them. | ||
| 3-23-06 | |||
| Question | Batting Gloves hanging out of pockets. I've noticed that there is a lot more leaway given in enforcing this rule. It's most notable with defensive players. "Since, defensively, the intent of the rule is a moot point, what difference does it make if the gloves hang out?" How should this rule be interpreted since, indeed, defensively it makes no sense? I just want to get the official interpretation since we have had players question the umpires enforcing it on defense. | ||
| Answer | As to the batting gloves, if you are seeing it as a trend, maybe reminding coaches in the pregame conference to have them tucked into those pockets would help. We included batting gloves in the intro of rule 3 because we had several situations where a ball deflected off a batting glove...whether a gloved dropped by a runner who was holding it in her hand and dropped it or a glove falling out of a pocket of an infielder. The penalty is just to enforce the appropriate blocked ball effect but rather than deal with that, the committee put it in the intro and tried to avoid an umpire having to rule on it (or a tag on a floppy glove on a head first slide). It seemed like the best thing to do because for some reason, we had it happen numerous times in the same year (much like the season we had numerous batted balls hit the rosin bag of their own pitcher who had left it on the field). Funny how things happen in bunches but I guess that's how we are motivated to make changes. Anyway, if you remind them to tuck them in whether on offense or defense, maybe it would help avoid having to make those base awards! | ||
| 3-20-06 | |||
| Question |
We are having a lot of discussion with the tarp stored on the field. 1-25 (page 39) states that the fielder may not have either foot on the tarp. This allows the fielder to lean against the tarp and make a catch as long as neither foot is on the tarp. |
||
| Answer |
In both the cases you describe, you have a catch because neither foot is on the tarp. Stepping on a tarp has always been discouraged because metal spikes can rip through tarp material and render a $5,000 tarp useless. |
||
| 3-10-06 | |||
| Question & Answer |
A was playing B. In the Fourth inning the A coach calls time and announces a substitute of 6 for 24. I repeated 6 for 24 and recorded it on my lineup card. I announced 6 for 24 to the B coach. When you record the substitution reported to you that renders 24 out of the game (and if a starter, still has her re-entry) and enters 6 from the bench (her allowable entry into the game). After the next pitch the B coach called time and came out and said to me, "You announced 6 for 24 to us, but that is number 12 on the base." I looked at the runner and indeed it was number 12. Now you have an unreported substitution (number 12 for number 6) so 6 is out of the game permanently and you apply rule 8, section 3c4 which is no pitch, the unreported player is out and declared officially in the game. I walked over to the A coach and told him about the mistake he had made. I told him that he could either keep 12 in the game or re-enter 24, but that either way it was an out. He opted to re-enter 24. Which is fine but that puts 12 out of the game permanently, 24 has used her one re-entry, and there is no baserunner now due to the out. At the end of the inning I told the B coach that because 12 had incorrectly entered the game that she was no longer viable as a substitute, but that 6 was. Bummer...here's where you went wrong cause 6 was in and then out immediately when 12 entered for her so she indeed was not available based on rule 8, section 5a3. |
||
| 3-8-06 | |||
| Question | page 109; the a.r. at bottom on obstruction. It seems to contradict itself in the ruling. Can you clear up? | ||
| Answer | we are missing a phrase that might clear it up....it should read "A runner who misses a base or leaves a base before a fly ball is first touched and is obstructed while advancing would not be protected when returning to the base missed or left too soon; however, she would be protected if obstructed while trying to return to the base." | ||
| 3-8-06 | |||
| Question | The bat passes through the stike zone and the batter grabs bat with right hand and then pokes it across home plate. The time of the bat passing across the plate was at the TOP but the ball was not at the plate. ruling? if she does this and makes contact do we have interference? | ||
| Answer | I am not sure I understand what you are describing but if the batter swings through the strikezone, that's a strike and she cannot then swing or poke at the same pitch and make contact. If she does make contact on what would be her second attempt, then apply rule 11, section 21k and call the batter out and return the runners. If she does not make contact, you have a strike by virtue of the initial swing. | ||
| 3-8-06 | |||
| Question | Bases loaded 1 out. Ball goes up behind 1st; 2nd baseman comes over for play; INFFR is called.Ball drops everbody advances but when I look up after telling coach that batter is out; it seems R1 tagged plate; took a few steps and then retreated down the base line.(PU tells me that). I looked I saw 2 runners between 3rd and home. Defense; if I remember correctly; doesn"t do anything. Is automatic interference called? or do nothing without the defense doing something? This was 16U girls tourney. | ||
| Answer | All of the codes are slightly different so you'd need to consult someone in ASA, USSSA, NSA, or Dixie ball which ever organization's rules were in use. If it were an NCAA game, immediately when you call interference, the ball is dead and the offending runner is out. If the interference prevents the fielder from catching a routine fly ball, the batter is ALSO out (rule 9, section 13a4). | ||
| 3-7-06 | |||
| Question | Offensive team coach had 4 players outside of the dugout in dead ball territory in the spectator area swinging bats with the timing of the ball being released by the pitcher and 1 player hitting a ball attached to rubberized cords during each ∏ inning they were at bat. Umpires ruled players had to be in dugout and applied Rule 6 Section 4c, d and e. Is this a correct ruling? | ||
| Answer | I am not sure what you mean by dead ball territory in the spectator area but between innings, you would be correct to apply 6-4d for activity on the field of play. If there is an area outside the field of play (bullpens or batting tunnels are the most common) and they are swinging/throwing/pitching in those areas between innings, 6-4d does not apply because it is off the field and in fact, 6-4c allows for use of the bullpen and dead ball areas while the ball is in play. | ||
| 3-7-06 | |||
| Question | Being in the Northwest with our rain and cool weather, the home team had heaters in their dugout but the visiting team did not. The questions were: 1. does this create and unfair advantage; 2. does the home team have to provide heaters to the visiting teams. | ||
| Answer | There is nothing in the playing rule book that requires a home team to provide the same heaters, blankets or warm clothing to their visitors. In 5-3 there are some accommodations for visiting team pregame batting practice equipment and space but other than that coaches are left to their own sense of fair play or possible conference requirements (for example, most conferences have arrangements for a water cooler in not only the home team but also the visiting team dugout). | ||
| 3-7-06 | |||
| Question | Bats are sitting in front of a heater being warmed. The bats also were hot to touch and burnt umpires fingers. Are all these bats considered altered at the time discovered and be removed from the game? Is a warning issued to the coach for knowingly having his players altering the bats or do nothing? | ||
| Answer | If you are working a game with heaters in the dugout, it would be a sound preventative umpiring technique to be sure the bats are not in front of the heater when you check them pregame AND to remind the coach (then or in the pregame meeting) that equipment is not to be altered by heating. This would apply to balls and bats under rule 3, sections 1c and 2e respectively. Heated bats will come back to normal temperature fairly quickly so if discovered in the pregame inspection, they could be suitable for play by game time but if discovered during play (as you mention, umpire picks up the bat and burns his/her fingers), the bat should be removed from the game just as any other altered bat would be. |
||
| 2-26-06 | |||
| Question | If all team's/players' full names (first and last) as well as numbers are pre- printed on the lineup card, is it an inaccurate lineup if only the first names and numbers are listed in the current written batting order? | ||
| Answer | See rule 5, section 5 (lineup) and rule 1, section 63 note 2 (definition of inaccurate line-up card). The first specifies what must be on the card with an AR that allows for the omission of the first name on the written lineup as long as first and last names are printed on the card. The second says "omitting the last name makes the player ineligible, not the card inaccurate." The coach is responsible for knowing the requirement to list the uniform and position numbers and names so if there are errors on the card, apply the penalties as written in the book. However, the NCAA softball rules committee encourages umpires to use preventative umpiring techniques by not accepting an incomplete lineup card at the pregame meeting. This would be an appropriate time to hand the card back to the coach and ask that he/she complete the card. |
||
| 2-26-06 | |||
| Question | Is it an inaccurate lineup card if a player, Jane Doe wearing number 7, is listed as Jane Doe, number 7 in the written batting order but is listed as Jane Doe, number 18 in the pre- printed roster on the bottom of the card? | ||
| Answer | Again, there is an opportunity to use preventative umpiring by asking the coaches to review their line-up cards before they become official. Hopefully they would catch their own error and confusion can be avoided. However if it does go undetected, the written lineup would take precedence and in this situation, a correction to the card would be made but no other action. HOWEVER if it were reversed (Jane Doe is wearing number 7, is listed on the written lineup as number 18 but on the printed lineup as 7), that becomes an inaccurate lineup. |
||
| 2-26-06 | |||
| Question | And can the incorrect number at the bottom of the card be changed by merely crossing out the incorrect number and putting in the present number beside her name in the pre-printed portion? Before or after the lineup is made official? | ||
| Answer | Yes, many time teams with multiple uniforms have someone with two numbers depending on the uniform jersey so coaches can cross out the incorrect number and replace it with the correct one. This should be done prior to the start of the game but sometimes is caught during the contest. The number should be corrected to match the written lineup. | ||
| 2-21-06 | 10 Second Rule | ||
|
Questions
about the Ten Second Rule |
First situation: At the start of the game, the home team has finished their warm-up and are huddling at the mound, the pitcher has the ball and the batter is at the box ready to hit. Should the umpire call "Play Ball" and start the 10 second count or should he wait until the huddle breaks. DEE: Manage the flow of the game by allowing the huddle to break up but if this is taking an excessive amount of time, you can walk toward the mound and encourage the players to assume their positions. If your reminders continue without a change in their behavior, it MIGHT be necessary to say "play ball" and begin the count but I suspect that will be the exception. Most players will adapt their timing and finish their huddle and be ready to disperse and play in reasonable time. Second situation: The batter is in the box and pitcher on the mound before the 10 second count and the five second has begun, after 3-4 seconds the pitcher backs off the mound. It does not appear that she is having trouble with the sign. She has not shook off any signs. Should we call time? Should we award a ball? DEE: Before the count begins, there is plenty of time for giving the players latitude but if the ten seconds expires and the pitcher just walks off the back of the mound for no apparent reason, this is the behavior we are trying to change by awarding a ball to the batter. IF she has a legitimate issue (loses her grip on the ball, has trouble with the signs, doesn't like the pitch called), that's an appropriate time for you to call time and allow everyone to reset themselves without penalizing her by awarding a ball. Third situation : The batter and pitcher are in position and the 5 second count has begun, (a) the batter steps out of the box causing the pitcher to step off the mound before the 5 seconds are up; DEE: strike but the key here is the batter caused it...not both happening simultaneously (b) the batter steps out before the 5 seconds are up and the pitcher stays on the mound; DEE: strike (c) the pitcher steps off causing the batter to step out; DEE: ball but the key here is the pitcher caused it...not both happening simultaneously (d) the batter and pitcher are in position and the pitcher does not start her pitching motion after 5 seconds. DEE: ball In all these cases, you do have the ability to call time and not award balls and strikes if you believe there's a legitimate issue as in the second situation. These are situations that happened this weekend and there is a difference of opinion as to the correct procedure to implement. I believe the pitcher should give some indication she is having problems with the sign, such as shaking her head. If she steps off the mound before the 5 seconds are up causing the batter to step out I believe the penalty should go to the pitcher. If the batter steps out of the box causing the pitcher to step off the penalty should go to the batter. AM I WRONG DEE: You are correct but know that this behavior change will take some time. To get where we want to go, it will take reminding but also consistent enforcement. The "nice guy" umpire who lets it slide will only make it harder for the coach and player to understand when it is appropriately called. So while there is a adaptation curve, we would like them to know our expectation is that they will adapt to the timing as written. |
||
| 2-21-06 | |||
| Question | First: The coach informed the home plate umpire that he was going to protest the spelling of one of the girl's last names on the line-up if they were forced to go into a tiebreaker. Second: in game 2 he did protest the spelling of a girl's first name. In the first instance the player's name was written incorrectly on the line-up, but was correctly printed on the bottom of the line-up. The question the umpires had was since it was brought to our attention by the coach before he invoked the rule should we inform the opposing coach that this was brought to our attention and would she like to correct it (preventive umpiring)? Second, since the name on the bottom of the line-up was correct and there was only one person with this last name (first name misspelled) is it still an inaccurate line-up? |
||
| Answer | First, the possible misspelling of a player’s name…this is a judgment call and will depend on the confusion the misspelling brings. If there are two players on the team named Smith and Smythe and the name on the card is written Smyth, there’s a better case for a penalty than if Tschida is misspelled Tchida. Similarly, if someone’s first name is misspelled but the last name is correct and unique to just one player, there is little chance of confusion (for example, Stephanie is misspelled as Stefany but her last name is Smith and there are no other Smiths on the team). The benefit of the doubt should go to not penalizing the team if no confusion results or if the writing is difficult to read but the printing at the bottom for the card is clear. Second, when the umpires accept the line-up cards, they review them and can ask for corrections if they notice a misspelling or something more serious (like a DP but no FLEX listed or two players listed with their position as the pitcher). The opportunity to correct any of those mistakes in the pre-game meeting just eliminates confusion later and is good preventative umpiring. Many coaches have adopted the lineup card with their roster printed because they lack attention to details (like spelling) when they are in a hurry or they have student managers who they cannot trust to spell everything correctly or they know their writing is difficult to read. By having the printed roster, the media and announcers are able to get the accurate information they need and the coaches can scribble so it seems to be a great improvement to the old scrap of paper lineup. |
||
| 2-21-06 | |||
| Question | Team A did not put first names on their lineup card and it was submitted to the umpires at the pre-game meeting that way. Later in the game a player from Team A hit a 2-run home run. The Team B coach brought out the lineup card and appealed to the umpire that Team A submitted an inaccurate lineup card. The question is: Should the umpires have given the lineup back to the coach for correction at the Coaches Pregame at home plate? |
||
| Answer | If the umpire noticed that first names were omitted from the line-up card (and I would hope they would notice this when they review the card in the pregame meeting), he/she should return the card to the coach and ask for its completion. This would apply to any missing information on the card (like a DP but no FLEX, no substitutes listed on the card, etc). In general, we have encouraged preventative umpiring in cases in which an umpire can prevent a mistake - even after the game has started. For example, if an offensive coach uses a conference in an inning and later in that same inning, a batter or baserunner asks the umpire for time to confer with the coach, we hope the umpire will not grant time and remind the player there is not a conference available. Another example would be if a coach comes to the umpire to make a substitution and says #2-Jones for #3-Smith, we want the umpire to question whether the coach wants #1-Jones or #2-Doe to replace Smith because either the number or name is wrong on the line-up card. I know there is a small faction of coaches who disagree and think the umpire should allow mistakes to happen and leave it to the opposing coach to appeal but so far, they are still in the minority and we continue to support the idea of preventative umpiring. |
||
| 2-20-06 | |||
| Question | The question has come up about the beginning of an inning. Does the time between pitches apply to the beginning of each half inning? The pitcher has the ball (after warm ups) and now the team all huddles, the batter is near the batters box and the umpire is ready are we applying this rule or just enforcing it between pitches was the inning has started? | ||
| Answer | It was really meant for between pitches within an inning or by the same pitcher but it is not in conflict if you start the inning by saying "play " or "play ball" and then the ten seconds begins. And it would be a useful tool if one team is ready to go and the other is dawdling around! | ||
| 1-27-06 | |||
| Question | Rule 3-8d reference that a face mask may be worn and states it should meet the NOCSAE standard. I do not want to ASSUME so I am coming to the rules expert for your opinion, and I mean that in a positive way. Can a mask that is worn offensively meet the NOCSAE standard and not display the NOCSAE approval and if so how would we know it was approved? Or is the interpretation of this mean that the mask must display NOCSAE Approved on it like in ASA and NFHS? |
||
| Answer |
There really is a rule difference here... |
||
| 1-27-06 | |||
| Question | If a face mask/guard/protector is attached to an offensive helmet, does this mask/guard/protector have to have a NOCSAE approved stamp or sticker on it? | ||
| Answer | No, the requirement in the NCAA rule book relative to NOCSAE are that the helmet must have the permanent NOCSAE mark and exterior warning label (both legible) and if a face mask is attached it should meet the standard for the helmet and mask combination. Rationale-while the rules committee would like to require that the helmet and mask combination have NOCSAE certification, it is not practical that umpires know all the appropriate combinations and could enforce the rule. Masks that are attached to helmets by the manufacturer obviously meet the combined standard however masks sold separately are marketed with a list of appropriate helmets. If they are attached to other helmets, they would not necessarily meet the standard. |
||
| 1-24-06 | |||
| Question | The coaches asked me to contact you regarding the Worth/Wilson ball situation. For our program, they are asking to have the defensive team select the ball in play. Since both balls meet NCAA standard, I do not believe it will change the game. Should a protest be filed, what are your thoughts if coaches agree before the game? My fall back is by rule, the home team supplies the game balls. This early in the year, teams prefer pitchers to get used to throwing the ball they will use in conference play. |
||
| Answer | The rule to refer to is 3-1b...the balls must be the same spec and manufacturer so maybe the easiest thing to do is to tell each team they must pay the game fee and provide 3 balls of this specific manufacturer and model. Then everyone will bring the same to the fields. Or you can let them bring what they want and have a stock of balls and just trade them out so if field A has 3 Wilson and 3 Worth, you exchange 3 of your Worth for Wilson so they have all Wilson then on field B you exchange 3 Wilsons for Worth and they play with all Worth. You'd just need a few of each to keep trading around so each field has all one ball type but there would be difference field to field My sense is most folks use the first part of specifying a particular ball for a tournament but either would work.. |
||
| 1-18-06 | |||
| Question | If a coach is ejected, who is responsible for filling out the the Incident and Protest Form? Is it the ejecting umpire or the plate umpire. The book seems to suggest it is the plate umpire. I would think that it needs to be the ejecting umpire. Personally, I would like a report from both. Maybe not an incident report from both, but definitely a report. |
||
| Answer |
In both cases, the plate umpire is responsible for completing and filing the form (rule 15, sections 11 and 14). If the report from the coach and plate umpire differ in important details, I usually call the opposing coach, on-site administrator and/or other members of the umpire crew for their recollection of the details so sometimes I do hear from the ejecting umpire. |
||
| 1-18-06 | |||
| Question | Ten second rule - if we do not grant time and the batter steps out anyway, does the old rule apply and we call the pitch as thrown, or do we kill the ball and award a strike as in the new rule. |
||
| Answer | If the batter steps out without having time and the pitcher throws the pitch, then the call would be a ball or strike as thrown. | ||
| 1-9-06 | |||
| Question | Rule 3-8d reference that a face mask may be worn and states it should meet the NOCSAE standard. I do not want to ASSUME so I am coming to the rules expert for your opinion, and I mean that in a positive way. Can a mask that is worn offensively meet the NOCSAE standard and not display the NOCSAE approval and if so how would we know it was approved? Or is the interpretation of this mean that the mask must display NOCSAE Approved on it like in ASA and NFHS? |
||
| Answer | There really is a rule difference here... The NCAA rule is that the face mask should meet the NOCSAE standard FOR THE MASK AND HELMET COMBINATION. I think the ASA and NFHS address the helmet and mask separately (but do not address the units combined) and require each to be NOCSAE approved. As much as we would like to say must and not should, it is not possible for us to expect the umpires to know which face mask is approved for use with which helmet. For example, Schutt's Pro-Guard 3000 facemask meets the standard when affixed to any Schutt helmet however Schutt's original Pro-Guard only meets the standard when affixed to the Schutt 2788, 2794, 2800 or 2898 models. And some facemasks meet the standard even when affixed to a competitor's helmet so just because a Rawlings mask is on a Mizuno helmet, it should not be eliminated from play...it might indeed be a suitable combination. So for the umpire, it's not realistic to expect them to know all the appropriate combinations HOWEVER for the coach (who also uses the rulebook..albeit sparingly for some) who provides the equipment, they need to know they "should" provide a suitable match either by purchasing the equipment already attached or by reading the instruction sheet on the unattached mask and attaching it to one of the helmet models listed as approved. Making that a "must" is, unfortunately, not enforceable and we try to keep unenforceable rules out of the book. |
||
|
|||