Step on home plate "on purpose"

[Rajun Cajun]

I thought I would share this with you. I have never seen this in a game, but I thought I would share this with you. In today's semi finals in a Beaumont, TX- Nations 10U select tournament we made it to the semi finals. Our opponet was a fantastic team from Tyler, TX, the Tyler Braves. We were the visitor, and with time expiring in 6 minutes the opponets coach told the umpire that he would have his batter step on home plate while hitting the ball to record the last out of the inning. This was to get a new inning started, adn get their line up at the top of the order again. The score was home 4, visitor 6. I had no idea this conversation took place with the home plate umpire before the pitch. Naturally, the batter stepped on home plate on purpose and recorded the out, to intentionally get into a situation to start a new inning.

The final score was 7 to 6 in favor of the tyler team. We didn't score again, and their bats came alive to get the victory.

Anyone ever seen this "intentional stepping on home plate" by a batter?

[hitnpeas]

I thought I would share this with you. I have never seen this in a game, but I thought I would share this with you. In today's semi finals in a Beaumont, TX- Nations 10U select tournament we made it to the semi finals. Our opponet was a fantastic team from Tyler, TX, the Tyler Braves. We were the visitor, and with time expiring in 6 minutes the opponets coach told the umpire that he would have his batter step on home plate while hitting the ball to record the last out of the inning. This was to get a new inning started, adn get their line up at the top of the order again. The score was home 4, visitor 6. I had no idea this conversation took place with the home plate umpire before the pitch. Naturally, the batter stepped on home plate on purpose and recorded the out, to intentionally get into a situation to start a new inning.

The final score was 7 to 6 in favor of the tyler team. We didn't score again, and their bats came alive to get the victory.

Anyone ever seen this "intentional stepping on home plate" by a batter?


I have seen it a lot in slow pitch softball.... One minute left in the game down by a few runs with 2 outs. Instead of trying to get several runs with 2 outs, you step on the plate, play good D and come back with 3 outs remaining to win the game. Ive seen the stalling done the other way as well. Teams taking their time getting into the box, letting pitches go or fouling them off on purpose to run the clock out. Can't say I have ever seen it in LL baseball though....

[ipitch]

When I was 9 years old I remember my coach telling us to strike out on purpose so that the other team would get to bat. We won a couple of games by over 50 runs.

[Mark H]

Time limits introduce this sort of thing. Some call it cheesy. Some call it playing by the rules you are given. I like this better than the time wasting done in order to make the time limit run out.

[Ursa Major]

Yeah, I know that tournament/travel ball can be very competitive, but in a 10U game? How do you feel when you're the sacrificial lamb sent up to take the out for your team, after being told, "Sorry, Timmy, we need a run but don't think you've got what it takes to get a rally going. So take the out and please don't forget to have your Dad wax my car tonight." Sounds like sports in Texas to me.

[hitnpeas]

Yeah, I know that tournament/travel ball can be very competitive, but in a 10U game? How do you feel when you're the sacrificial lamb sent up to take the out for your team, after being told, "Sorry, Timmy, we need a run but don't think you've got what it takes to get a rally going. So take the out and please don't forget to have your Dad wax my car tonight." Sounds like sports in Texas to me.

Yeah, pretty sure it only happens down here..... :rolleyes:

[AgentX]

Yeah, I know that tournament/travel ball can be very competitive, but in a 10U game? How do you feel when you're the sacrificial lamb sent up to take the out for your team, after being told, "Sorry, Timmy, we need a run but don't think you've got what it takes to get a rally going. So take the out and please don't forget to have your Dad wax my car tonight." Sounds like sports in Texas to me.

This kind of competition is exactly what I'd expect in the semi-finals of a select team tournament, regardless of the age or place.

[Rajun Cajun]

Live and learn I suppose.

Now that I have seen it done to us, I won't think twice about doing it in a game that really counts. I will admit it is very good strategy. I do teach the kids to do their very best on every pitch and with every swing of the bat. So, this will be a hard adjustment for me to make coaching wise if faced with a similar situation. Next time, if I suspect it is going to happen, I will do an intentional walk and then do 60 throws to first base and stall the game out that way until time expires, then change pitchers and try for a strike out, or a force play to either first or second. Live and learn....

[MrUmpireSir]

Rule 4.15 A game may be forfeited to the opposing team when a team— (b) Employs tactics palpably designed to delay or shorten the game;

Coach: "Ump, I'm going to tell my batter to step on the plate so we can get another inning in."

Umpire: "Do that and the game's over. You lose."

[AgentX]

This is not an action that either delays or shortens the game.

If you were to interpret it as such, then you'd probably need to do the same to an intentional walk. It's essentially the offensive equivalent.

[MrUmpireSir]

This is not an action that either delays or shortens the game.

If you were to interpret it as such, then you'd probably need to do the same to an intentional walk. It's essentially the offensive equivalent.

It shortens an inning, which is part of the game. Or it lengthens the game by manipulating the clock (not contemplated, granted, by OBR). Either way, I would be comfortable citing the rule to discourage such manipulation of the game.

The IBB is different - it is NOT being done specifically to affect the length of the game, but to obtain tactical advantage.

[scorekeeper]

I love it! And, I’d tag an ejection onto it for the player and the coach for USC too, in the hopes that it would disqualify them from the next game!

How low on the food chain does a coach have to be that would do that?

[MrUmpireSir]

I love it! And, I’d tag an ejection onto it for the player and the coach for USC too, in the hopes that it would disqualify them from the next game!

How low on the food chain does a coach have to be that would do that?

Attempting to enlist the prior support of the umpire is particularly offensive.

[HYP]

Although I can see that this may be a good strategy to win the game, because they did end up winning. I could never in good faith do it. Oh, I have talked about something similar and have been tempted to try it but I could never bring myself to go through with it.

IMO it belittles the game. The object is to play the game. Trust me I am as or more competitive then anyone and want to win desperately but to ask a kid to get out just seems wrong.

I have coached travel ball and academy teams for some time now. I never stall and never would do something that would or could embarass my team. I had an instance where we were winning and we could have stalled in one inning because time was starting to get tight. I told my team that we would not do the stall tactic and that if we were going to win it was going to be in a complete game and we would just have to beat the game.

I have rules. We call it 9 to 5. All 9 of my players need to be on or off the field before 5 of thiers get on.

I beleive in respecting the game and playing it the way it was designed to be played.

I hope this guy won coach of the year and it will give him something to brag about while sitting around having drinks with his buddies.

[ipitch]

I beleive in respecting the game and playing it the way it was designed to be played.

Was baseball designed with a time limit?

[Rajun Cajun]

Evidently he hasn't lost a game in 2 years. Our best pitcher had the performance of his life and held a team that is fairly used to run-ruling the opponets most every game. Nice to have power, good contact, great pitching at the 10U level. We don't. We have got to do everything right and make zero defensive mistakes because we are short on pitching and the bottom half of the line-up has been fairly lethargic. We're just trying to scrape together a win here and win there and hopefully one day win out on Sunday.

I am okay with losing, but it was a hard loss to take. I've never seen our pitcher cry before, but hey we all learned something that day. What made it particularly interesting was that in the first inning our starting pitcher gave up two walks in a row and I had to make a premature pitching change. Even with those two walks we didn't fall a part and kept on playing.

It was still a tight game in the "extra" inning that we had to play. They tied it up 6/6, Runner on third with 2 outs and a nice bunt down the first base line to score the go-ahead run.

[songtitle]

Folks, if this upsets you, I wouldn't go to any tournaments.

[Jake Patterson]

Attempting to enlist the prior support of the umpire is particularly offensive.
Could not agree more. Sorry ... game over.

[Jake Patterson]

Folks, if this upsets you, I wouldn't go to any tournaments.
I've attended as a player and parent, watched, and coached in many tournament games... This whole diaper ball tournament stuff is unbelievable.

[ipitch]

Rule 4.15 A game may be forfeited to the opposing team when a team— (b) Employs tactics palpably designed to delay or shorten the game;


In this case, stepping on the plate in order to play another inning does not delay or shorten the game. It lengthens the game.

[Mark H]

True.

This sort of thing WILL happen when you introduce time limits. Time limits which are, I understand, a necessary evil in a tourney situation. Everyone does have jobs and school Monday after all. Doesn't matter what age either. Same thing happens at 18. Arguing everyone should relax a lot at the younger ages is true and futile. People are people. When you start monkeying with OBR, you end up with unintended consequences. The kids get to play a bunch of innings of America's pastime. Let it go.

[g-mac]

I have rules. We call it 9 to 5. All 9 of my players need to be on or off the field before 5 of thiers get on.


Not to get off topic here, but I love that rule and plan on adding it tomorrow night.:thumbsup:
Thanks.

[HYP]

Was baseball designed with a time limit?

No it was not designed with a time limit. But asking a 10 year old to go out there and make an out is wrong.

Why, so an adult coach can brag later about what a great decision he made with his 10 year old team? are you kidding me?

Songtitle,

I've been around travel ball for many years and have never done this. I've seen it done and thought it was bush then and still do.

[ipitch]

No it was not designed with a time limit. But asking a 10 year old to go out there and make an out is wrong.

Is it really any different than a sac bunt?

sac bunt - making an out on purpose in order to increase your chances of winning

stepping on the plate - making an out on purpose in order to increase your chances of winning


Why, so an adult coach can brag later about what a great decision he made with his 10 year old team? are you kidding me?


Where did that come from? The reason it's done isn't so that the coach can brag - it's done in an attempt to win the game.

[scorekeeper]

In this case, stepping on the plate in order to play another inning does not delay or shorten the game. It lengthens the game.

Not true. The rule doesn’t take into account a game with time limits, because in “normal” baseball games, there aren’t any. So, anything done to bring the normal end to the game closer, is shortening the game.

4.15
A game may be forfeited to the opposing team when a team --
(b) Employs tactics palpably designed to delay or shorten the game;

[scorekeeper]

Is it really any different than a sac bunt?

sac bunt - making an out on purpose in order to increase your chances of winning

stepping on the plate - making an out on purpose in order to increase your chances of winning

That’s horse bleep! The intention of a sac bunt is not to purposely make an out! Its to put the defense in the position of choosing to make a play at 1st rather than some other base, in order to put the original runner in a better position to score. No one ever wants to give up the out. They hope like crazy there’s a misplay or the batter beats the throw.

Where did that come from? The reason it's done isn't so that the coach can brag - it's done in an attempt to win the game.

Are you the coach in question?

[ipitch]

Not true. The rule doesn’t take into account a game with time limits, because in “normal” baseball games, there aren’t any. So, anything done to bring the normal end to the game closer, is shortening the game.

4.15
A game may be forfeited to the opposing team when a team --
(b) Employs tactics palpably designed to delay or shorten the game;

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Stepping on the plate will allow you to play another inning 100% of the time. Not stepping on the plate means that the game might end before another inning starts.

[Mark H]

Ipitch has a point. You may think the tactic is cheesy but it is definitely an attempt to extend the length of the game in order to have a better chance to win.

[scorekeeper]

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Stepping on the plate will allow you to play another inning 100% of the time. Not stepping on the plate means that the game might end before another inning starts.

Well, to begin with, 100% of the time is an exaggeration. What if it’s the top of the last regulation inning, the visiting team is behind, and there’s 2 outs?

Be that as it may, you’re thinking in terms of a game with time limits on it. Since the rules of baseball doesn’t have those limits, the rules are written to reflect that. Therefore, anything done to cause an out on purpose would be shortening the game.

[ipitch]

That’s horse bleep! The intention of a sac bunt is not to purposely make an out! Its to put the defense in the position of choosing to make a play at 1st rather than some other base, in order to put the original runner in a better position to score. No one ever wants to give up the out. They hope like crazy there’s a misplay or the batter beats the throw.


Of course they HOPE no outs are recorded, but a manager that calls for a sac bunt will be happy if the batter does his job of advancing the runner one base and the out is recorded at 1st base.

Think of it this way... Runner on 1st, no outs. If manager of the hitting team could snap his fingers and instantly change the situation to a runner on 2nd and 1 out, would he do it? Some managers certainly would.

[scorekeeper]

Ipitch has a point. You may think the tactic is cheesy but it is definitely an attempt to extend the length of the game in order to have a better chance to win.

Ipitch has no point what-so-ever. That tactic could only extend a game in the very narrow circumstance of when time limits are put on the games, and that’s only done as a convenience to other teams and players in a tournament. If a team uses hustle, or something like a pitcher refusing his warm-ups, that’s one thing. But purposely causing an out is cheating everyone, and the game.

Look at it this way. Let’s say the score in the OP was 10-4 instead of 6-4. Now let’s assume the coach looked at his watch and thought he saw there was 10 minutes left when there was really no time to start another inning an he had his player purposely give up the out.

Now the game’s over and the coach is faced with trying to explain how he got hoisted on his own petard. How many people would still be defending him as a tactical genius?

The bottom line is to play the game straight up. If you win that’s great, you tip your cap and play another game. If you lose that’s too bad, but you tip your cap and play another game.

[ipitch]

Well, to begin with, 100% of the time is an exaggeration. What if it’s the top of the last regulation inning, the visiting team is behind, and there’s 2 outs?


This is about HOME teams stepping on the plate. It's gets you another inning 100% of the time (when the manager knows how much time is left), without exaggeration.

I've never seen a visiting team do it. It would be be poor strategy, IMO.

Be that as it may, you’re thinking in terms of a game with time limits on it.

Of course I am! That's what this thread is about.

[ipitch]

Look at it this way. Let’s say the score in the OP was 10-4 instead of 6-4. Now let’s assume the coach looked at his watch and thought he saw there was 10 minutes left when there was really no time to start another inning an he had his player purposely give up the out.

Now the game’s over and the coach is faced with trying to explain how he got hoisted on his own petard. How many people would still be defending him as a tactical genius?


Well, geez, even I agree that in that situation stepping on the plate was a TERRIBLE idea!

I am only talking about situations when it is good idea. Such as, home team is down 12-6 with two outs and no runners on in the 5th inning. 30 seconds left.

[hitnpeas]

This is about HOME teams stepping on the plate. It's gets you another inning 100% of the time (when the manager knows how much time is left), without exaggeration.

I've never seen a visiting team do it. It would be be poor strategy, IMO.



Of course I am! That's what this thread is about.


Couldn't the pitcher just keep making a move towards an occupied base. Softball has a time limit to pitch, but in baseball I would bet you could stall enough to difuse the plan of stepping on the plate.

[davewashere]

Couldn't the pitcher just keep making a move towards an occupied base. Softball has a time limit to pitch, but in baseball I would bet you could stall enough to difuse the plan of stepping on the plate.

I was thinking the pitcher could just balk the runner on and then delay the game by continually throwing over to first, but of course the runner would have no incentive to get back safely since the coach wanted him to just get out anyway and he'd probably just jog around the bases until he was tagged out. If anything, this thread shows how adding a time limit really messes up the sport.

[HYP]

Is it really any different than a sac bunt?

sac bunt - making an out on purpose in order to increase your chances of winning

stepping on the plate - making an out on purpose in order to increase your chances of winning

IMO it is different then a sac bunt. When a kid lays down a sac bunt is he trying to get to 1st base or does he just stand in the box and say,
"I got the job done"? No, he is trying to be safe at 1st. He is willing to give himself up to move a runner into scoring position but I still think he is trying to be safe at first.

Telling a batter to step on the plate while hitting, so that the top of the order can get up is a little different.

On a sac bunt the kid can know that he got the ball down and moved the runner over. Being told to step on the plate just tells the kid he wasn't good enough and we need to get back to our better hitters.



Where did that come from? The reason it's done isn't so that the coach can brag - it's done in an attempt to win the game.

Beleive me, I'm 98% positive this coached bragged about it with either the parents or his buddies at some point. I know this guy(figuratively) he's the guy that is a win at all cost kind of guy, regardless of age.

I'm only a Varsity HS baseball coach and even there I am not a win at all cost kind of guy. If I was coaching professional players then I would be a win at all cost coach but for youth, there has to be some since of life lesson.

[soceric]

In this case, stepping on the plate in order to play another inning does not delay or shorten the game. It lengthens the game.

Doesn't delay mean to lengthen the game?


This stuff "happens" in tournament play, but it's really lame. :thumbsdown:


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/delay

[ipitch]

Doesn't delay mean to lengthen the game?

This stuff "happens" in tournament play, but it's really lame. :thumbsdown:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/delay

I don't think stepping on the plate qualifies as delaying the game. Delaying a game, IMHO, would be a pitcher making 10 pickoff attempts in a row, for example.

[HYP]

The bottom line is to play the game straight up. If you win that’s great, you tip your cap and play another game. If you lose that’s too bad, but you tip your cap and play another game.

I agree.

I could see it now.

scenerio 1)

Coach of defending team tells pitcher to take a ridiculous amount of time between pitches and do not throw a pitch anywhere close to the batter. Batter is running all over the place trying to swat at balls 15' from the plate.

Scenerio 2)

Baserunner steps off of base and stands in the middle of the base path. Opposing team throws a ball into the outfield, walks to get the ball and runner hasn't moved.

Scenerio 3)

If there is a base runner. Base runner steps off the base and walks into the dugout. Called out for the 3rd out.

See what this does, it causes a mockery of the game.

There are a bunch more scenerios I could think of that are just as ridiculous and some probably not so pleasant, especially with older kids, like getting ear holed.

Just play the game straight up like SK says. Win or lose.

[scorekeeper]

This is about HOME teams stepping on the plate. It's gets you another inning 100% of the time (when the manager knows how much time is left), without exaggeration.

I've never seen a visiting team do it. It would be be poor strategy, IMO.

Now you’re qualifying what you said, but you’re still wrong. What about when the manager knows how much time is left, but its not enough to start another inning? If a player does it, his is the home team, and they are behind, its game over 100% of the time.

Of course I am! That's what this thread is about.

But it makes no difference! If its done, as far as the rules go, it would be shortening the game, and be unsportsmanlike conduct as far as I’m concerned.

[soceric]

I don't think stepping on the plate qualifies as delaying the game. Delaying a game, IMHO, would be a pitcher making 10 pickoff attempts in a row, for example.

I get your point but it still delays or extends the game. It's one of those circumstances that you couldn't possibly foresee when the rule was made. With that said.. I'd also be surprised if an umpire enforced that rule in that situation. The cool thing about baseball is that there is no time limit.. there aren't any buzzer beaters, and there isn't any clock to beat. In baseball we've got extra innings and walkoffs.. :thumbsup:

[scorekeeper]

Doesn't delay mean to lengthen the game?
…

Yes it does, but the rule is covering “tactics” that either delay or shorten a game.

4.15
A game may be forfeited to the opposing team when a team --
(b) Employs tactics palpably designed to delay or shorten the game;[/QUOTE]

[Jake Patterson]

Does anyone here see a problem with cheesy tactics being discussed in a "timed" baseball game other than me? I just see this as an extension of the whole diaper ball tournament mentality that is hurting the game as a whole.

[soceric]

Yes it does, but the rule is covering “tactics” that either delay or shorten a game.

4.15
A game may be forfeited to the opposing team when a team --
(b) Employs tactics palpably designed to delay or shorten the game;

Yes.. That was my point..

[scorekeeper]

…IMHO …

And there you have it. You’re opinion is that stepping on the plate in the situation described is a good tactic and a life lesson you think the kids should learn. Obviously, there are many who’s opinions differ, and believe doing that is in bad form, bad taste, against the rules of baseball, and not something they want to pass on to children.

[davewashere]

I think the solution for this in time limit games is to give the umpire some discretion over when the game ends. If there are 10 minutes left and one team is clearly trying to make an out on purpose by some of the tactics mentioned in this thread the umpire can just stop play and say "game over". By giving the umpire power over the clock, no manager can be sure when the game is going to end, so these "winning the war by losing the battle" strategies would become useless. The strategy would become "play for the lead at the end of every late inning, because it could be the last".

[songtitle]

If you actually attend tournaments with time limit games, this type of thing is done all the time. Get used to it.

[ipitch]

Now you’re qualifying what you said, but you’re still wrong. What about when the manager knows how much time is left, but its not enough to start another inning? If a player does it, his is the home team, and they are behind, its game over 100% of the time.

There are tons of scenarios in which it's a bad idea. I never said it was a good idea in every situation.


But it makes no difference! If its done, as far as the rules go, it would be shortening the game, and be unsportsmanlike conduct as far as I’m concerned.

That's just your opinion. I've yet to see an umpire agree with that.

[MrUmpireSir]

I think the solution for this in time limit games is to give the umpire some discretion over when the game ends. If there are 10 minutes left and one team is clearly trying to make an out on purpose by some of the tactics mentioned in this thread the umpire can just stop play and say "game over". By giving the umpire power over the clock, no manager can be sure when the game is going to end, so these "winning the war by losing the battle" strategies would become useless. The strategy would become "play for the lead at the end of every late inning, because it could be the last".

The only watch that matters is the one the umpire has in his back pocket, so we already have this type of discretion. A common complaint at the end of a timed game is "But my watch says..." or "My cell phone says..."

The time is what we say it is. We don't take a vote on it.

[MrUmpireSir]

That's just your opinion. I've yet to see an umpire agree with that.

And I've yet to umpire a 10U game. Sounds like we've both been lucky....

[scorekeeper]

Does anyone here see a problem with cheesy tactics being discussed in a "timed" baseball game other than me? I just see this as an extension of the whole diaper ball tournament mentality that is hurting the game as a whole.

I’ve honestly seen this tide comin’ in for more than 15 years. Actually, it seems to have started gaining momentum about the same time folks figgered out that they could make a whole lot of money by providing venues where parents could show the world that their kid was SPECIAL.

I was just talking to my 89YO mom about all this craziness with youth sports. While I have great difficulty with this entire concept, she can’t even imagine it! Lest you think that an old Jewish lady born and raised in Chicago is just too unfamiliar with the game to understand it, try this. I have a good friend who played pro ball from ’39-’59, was a scout for 9 years, and was a ML pitching coach from ’68 thru 80. When I talk about this stuff with him, he honestly doesn’t understand how people could have their kids doing these things.

You and I are a generation behind them, and although our generation weren’t raised with their much stricter code of right and wrong, we at least were familiar with the concept. About half of the current generation seems to understand, but to the other half, the concept of fair play looks to be hopelessly lost.

The sad thing is, unless something very drastic happens, two generations from now, what we’re talking about will be commonplace. I think the only thing saving things now is, there are still a lot of grandparents and coaches who still remember when you’d get your narrow behind kicked if you did something like we’re discussing. When those folks are gone, who’s gonna carry the torch?

[ipitch]

Yes it does, but the rule is covering “tactics” that either delay or shorten a game.

4.15 game;

A game may be forfeited to the opposing team when a team --
(b) Employs tactics palpably designed to delay or shorten the game.

Just because you keep posting that rule, it doesn't mean that the rule applies.

Check out the rules above and below that rule...

(a) Fails to appear upon the field, or being upon the field, refuses to start play within five minutes after the umpire has called "Play" at the appointed hour for beginning the game, unless such delayed appearance is, in the umpire's judgment, unavoidable
(b) Employs tactics palpably designed to delay or shorten the game
(c) Refuses to continue play during a game unless the game has been suspended or terminated by the umpire
(d) Fails to resume play, after a suspension, within one minute after the umpire has called "Play"

Judging by (a), (c), and (d), it seems pretty clear that rule (b) is referring to teams that delay PLAYING THE GAME. There's no way that stepping on the plate applies to rule (b). It doesn't delay or shorten the game in any way.

[Jake Patterson]

If you actually attend tournaments with time limit games, this type of thing is done all the time. Get used to it.IMHO tournament baseball that requires time limits is not baseball. If the play is that poor that time restrictions are necessary they should not have tournament games. This, in my mind says something about the whole diaper ball thing in general... sorry for my cynicism.

[MrUmpireSir]

Judging by (a), (c), and (d), it seems pretty clear that rule (b) is referring to teams that delay PLAYING THE GAME. There's no way that stepping on the plate applies to rule (b). It doesn't delay or shorten the game in any way.

The tactic as described may either be said to be designed to shorten an inning, which is part of the game, OR to delay the game by lengthening it by another inning. Which it is does not matter; take your pick.

You will notice that, because OBR does not specifically deal with rules for time-limited games, the umpire must extrapolate a bit to apply the rule to this new situation, not specifically addressed in Official Baseball Rules. The umpire's authority to do this may be found in Rule 9.01(c):

Each umpire has authority to rule on any point not specifically covered in these rules.

As a general rule, umpires are (rightfully) very loathe to use 9.01(c), but given the particular facts of the tactic at hand, and the clear spirit and intent of the Rules, and general sportsmanship, I would feel comfortable with the interpretation as stated.

Of course, this is likely moot. Upon being told by the umpire that the Manager would forfeit if he employed this tactic, it is most unlikely that he would proceed as planned.

[songtitle]

IMHO tournament baseball that requires time limits is not baseball. If the play is that poor that time restrictions are necessary they should not have tournament games.

huh? Time restrictions are necessary so you can get the games finished during the weekend.

[scorekeeper]

Just because you keep posting that rule, it doesn't mean that the rule applies.

Check out the rules above and below that rule...

(a) Fails to appear upon the field, or being upon the field, refuses to start play within five minutes after the umpire has called "Play" at the appointed hour for beginning the game, unless such delayed appearance is, in the umpire's judgment, unavoidable
(b) Employs tactics palpably designed to delay or shorten the game
(c) Refuses to continue play during a game unless the game has been suspended or terminated by the umpire
(d) Fails to resume play, after a suspension, within one minute after the umpire has called "Play"

Judging by (a), (c), and (d), it seems pretty clear that rule (b) is referring to teams that delay PLAYING THE GAME. There's no way that stepping on the plate applies to rule (b). It doesn't delay or shorten the game in any way.


Well, you’ve already had your answer from one umpire, and I suspect that the majority of umpires would have told that coach if he had his player do that, ihe would be forfeiting the game.

One reason that crap happens in kiddyball, is that many times they don’t have experienced umpires who’d even think of it. Another is, they don’t have a high percentage of coaches tempered in battle so-to-speak who’d even consider such bush league crap.

As for what the other rules mean, don’t try to “judge” what one rule means by what others around it say. Look at the entire rule. Starting and Ending a Game. 4.15 refers to one way to end a game, by forfeit. Then it goes on to describe the ways a game might be forfeit.

Rule 4.15(b) says what it says! designed to delay or shorten. Do you not recognize the word OR as giving the reader a choice? If it didn’t mean both, it wouldn’t have listed both.

If you want to persist in trying to rationalize such an obvious unsportmanlike thing to do, go right on ahead. But when your team gets thumped by a forfeit by an umpire using either OBR, NFHS, or NCAA rules, don’t be surprised.

[HYP]

IMHO tournament baseball that requires time limits is not baseball. If the play is that poor that time restrictions are necessary they should not have tournament games. This, in my mind says something about the whole diaper ball thing in general... sorry for my cynicism.

Jake, i tend to agree with you on this. They will say the time limit is their to keep the day moving. What it is really there for is to allow them to jam as many teams in the tournaments as possible and therefore make as much money as possible.

[scorekeeper]

huh? Time restrictions are necessary so you can get the games finished during the weekend.

By Jove, I believe you’ve gotten it!

Believe it or not, there are a few folks out there who think baseball games should be played by baseball rules, and there’s no clock in baseball. Heck, even George Carlin knew that! ;)

[ipitch]

Rule 4.15(b) says what it says! designed to delay or shorten. Do you not recognize the word OR as giving the reader a choice? If it didn’t mean both, it wouldn’t have listed both.

I'm well aware that is says "or." I'm not sure why you think otherwise.


If you want to persist in trying to rationalize such an obvious unsportmanlike thing to do, go right on ahead. But when your team gets thumped by a forfeit by an umpire using either OBR, NFHS, or NCAA rules, don’t be surprised.

OK, and don't you be surprised when an umpire is suspended for calling such a forfeit.

[MrUmpireSir]

OK, and don't you be surprised when an umpire is suspended for calling such a forfeit.

Oh my. An umpire being "suspended" for refusing to partake in a Manager's plan for manipulating the game. How dramatic.

In truth, ipitch, if you wish to "game it out", I suppose it would go like this:

1. Manager approaches umpire and informs him of his master plan to end the inning and thus get back to the "top of the order" next inning.

2. Umpire tells Manager "Um, no, don't do it, or else, etc."

3. Manager does it anyway (a surprise).

4. Umpire declares forfeit (no surprise).

5. Manager launches protest.

6. Protest committee is told of the following facts: Manager concocts scheme to manipulate game and time rules. Has temerity to enlist the prior support of the umpire in the scheme. Umpires declines to play along, and gives Manager fair notice what will happen if he does it. Manager did it anyway. Protest Committee is now asked to give their "Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval" on the Managers tactic, and is asked (presumably) to order another inning of play.

Sure, ipitch, they could do it. But would they, really? Is this going to send the right message? Or would they more likely take refuge in the umpire's reasonably articulated application of Rules 4.15(b) and 9.01(c)?

Please. Just think about it.

[AgentX]

IMHO tournament baseball that requires time limits is not baseball. If the play is that poor that time restrictions are necessary they should not have tournament games. This, in my mind says something about the whole diaper ball thing in general... sorry for my cynicism.

THEY'RE KIDS.

They go to school during the week and have to get to bed early. They have homework and chores. Mom and/or Dad have to drive them to the field, and they have to work for a living.

If a facility was so fortunate as to have a vast number of fields at its disposal for hosting youth tourneys, then perhaps there would be no need for time limits in order to fit a tournament into a weekend. But it just doesn't always work out that way.

I think it's a bit harsh to say that "it's not baseball" just because the rules have been adapted. How would you feel about telling that to every kid in Little League?

"Sorry, kids, but this game that you're playing, it's just not baseball. Now get the heck off the field so that we can have a little talk about Santa Claus."

[songtitle]

The people here arguing against manipulating time rules, do not go to tourneys with time rules. hmmm

[ipitch]

Oh my. An umpire being "suspended" for refusing to partake in a Manager's plan for manipulating the game. How dramatic.

That was my response to this dramatic sentence by "scorekeeper"...But when your team gets thumped by a forfeit by an umpire using either OBR, NFHS, or NCAA rules, don’t be surprised.



In truth, ipitch, if you wish to "game it out", I suppose it would go like this:

1. Manager approaches umpire and informs him of his master plan to end the inning and thus get back to the "top of the order" next inning.

2. Umpire tells Manager "Um, no, don't do it, or else, etc."

3. Manager does it anyway (a surprise).

4. Umpire declares forfeit (no surprise).

5. Manager launches protest.

6. Protest committee is told of the following facts: Manager concocts scheme to manipulate game and time rules. Has temerity to enlist the prior support of the umpire in the scheme. Umpires declines to play along, and gives Manager fair notice what will happen if he does it. Manager did it anyway. Protest Committee is now asked to give their "Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval" on the Managers tactic, and is asked (presumably) to order another inning of play.

Sure, ipitch, they could do it. But would they, really? Is this going to send the right message? Or would they more likely take refuge in the umpire's reasonably articulated application of Rules 4.15(b) and 9.01(c)?

Please. Just think about it.

I've never stepped on the plate on purpose, but if I was going to do it, I wouldn't announce it to the umpire beforehand. I'd just do it.

BTW, how about an outfielder dropping a deep foul ball on purpose with the winning run on 3rd base with 1 out in the last inning. Are you going to tell me that that's unsportsmanlike too?

[scorekeeper]

I've never stepped on the plate on purpose, but if I was going to do it, I wouldn't announce it to the umpire beforehand. I'd just do it.

And then you wouldn’t be asking anyone else to become implicated in what you did. But that’s a far cry from an adult authority figure telling a little kid to do something even the little kid probably has to hold his nose to think about.

BTW, how about an outfielder dropping a deep foul ball on purpose with the winning run on 3rd base with 1 out in the last inning. Are you going to tell me that that's unsportsmanlike too?

You’re grasping at straws now.

[AgentX]

And then you wouldn’t be asking anyone else to become implicated in what you did. But that’s a far cry from an adult authority figure telling a little kid to do something even the little kid probably has to hold his nose to think about.

I seriously doubt that the kid had a problem with it. IME, kids in the semis of a select tourney will do anything they can to keep their chances afloat. These are competitive players, not runny-nosed rec kids who are playing just because mom wants them to make friends.

Its really not any different than having a QB spike a football to stop the clock. That's what happens with time limits. You have to manage the clock.

My bet is that the kid who is asked to do this in the tourney is going to be a lot happier doing it than he would be if his AB ended the tourney for his team.

[ipitch]

You’re grasping at straws now.

At this point, if I told you 2+2 was 4, I'm sure you'd try really hard to disagree with me.

How about the hidden-ball trick, letting a ball drop untouched in order to turn a double play, acting like you caught a ball when you know that you trapped it, etc? Are these unsportsmanlike too?

[AgentX]

I've never stepped on the plate on purpose, but if I was going to do it, I wouldn't announce it to the umpire beforehand. I'd just do it.
Based upon the outrage I've seen here, I think it's probably better to ask the ump just to make sure he isn't similarly outraged.

[bbb3601]

By Jove, I believe you’ve gotten it!

Believe it or not, there are a few folks out there who think baseball games should be played by baseball rules, and there’s no clock in baseball. Heck, even George Carlin knew that! ;)

LOL The great Carlin a man who really knew how parents ruin their kids!!

[MrUmpireSir]

I've never stepped on the plate on purpose, but if I was going to do it, I wouldn't announce it to the umpire beforehand. I'd just do it.

Then you are smarter than the Manager in question.

BTW, how about an outfielder dropping a deep foul ball on purpose with the winning run on 3rd base with 1 out in the last inning. Are you going to tell me that that's unsportsmanlike too?

No. The rules specifically address the situation in which balls are dropped intentionally, and the rule permits the situation you describe. Play on.

Rule 6.05(f): A batter is out when an infielder intentionally drops a fair fly ball or line drive, with first, first and second, first and third, or first, second and third base occupied before two are out. The ball is dead and runner or runners shall return to their original base or bases;
APPROVED RULING: In this situation, the batter is not out if the infielder permits the ball to drop untouched to the ground, except when the Infield Fly rule applies.

And by the way - stepping on the plate while batting the ball is not an automatic out, unless one foot was entirely outside the batters box; it is possible to step partially on the plate with a foot that is also touching the line of the box at the same time (but not likely for a 10 year old!). The line of the batters box is 6 inches from the plate. Or should be.... Be a real shame if the Manager did all that only to not get the call ;)

[Jake Patterson]

huh? Time restrictions are necessary so you can get the games finished during the weekend.
I think you missed the point...

[Mark H]

Jake, i tend to agree with you on this. They will say the time limit is their to keep the day moving. What it is really there for is to allow them to jam as many teams in the tournaments as possible and therefore make as much money as possible.

True. But the teams don't want to pay more than X to play in the tourney that weekend. Sure it's a bother. I don't like time limits either. But I don't see all the people who don't like time limits putting on their own tourneys without time limits either. Or at least not enough of them at a price people will pay so that it runs the time limit tourneys out of business. No one likes time limits and yet they remain. My thought is, put on your own no time limit tourneys or let it go.

[azmatsfan]

IMHO tournament baseball that requires time limits is not baseball. If the play is that poor that time restrictions are necessary they should not have tournament games. This, in my mind says something about the whole diaper ball thing in general... sorry for my cynicism.

So kids under 13 shouldn't play organized baseball? Our LL has similar time rules. Should I tell my son it's not baseball? Last year my LL minors team was up in the bottom of the 6th, bases loaded, 2 outs, tie game. The umpire called the game because we hit the drop dead time. It was disappointing and I wish the ump could have bent the rules since this was the last batter either way. (We had ties in Minors.) But it's hard to complain since those are the rules. It doesn't surprise me that there are coaches that would stall or employ tactics such as the OP described, but in my experience that's the exception, not the rule, even in travel tournaments.

[hitnpeas]

So kids under 13 shouldn't play organized baseball? Our LL has similar time rules. Should I tell my son it's not baseball? Last year my LL minors team was up in the bottom of the 6th, bases loaded, 2 outs, tie game. The umpire called the game because we hit the drop dead time. It was disappointing and I wish the ump could have bent the rules since this was the last batter either way. (We had ties in Minors.) But it's hard to complain since those are the rules. It doesn't surprise me that there are coaches that would stall or employ tactics such as the OP described, but in my experience that's the exception, not the rule, even in travel tournaments.

This can't possibly be the rule can it? You sure it isn't a "No new inning will be started after the time runs out" rule? If you really have it that way in your league, your league BOD's need to be lined up and shot!! :dismay:

[hitnpeas]

I seriously doubt that the kid had a problem with it. IME, kids in the semis of a select tourney will do anything they can to keep their chances afloat. These are competitive players, not runny-nosed rec kids who are playing just because mom wants them to make friends.

Its really not any different than having a QB spike a football to stop the clock. That's what happens with time limits. You have to manage the clock.

My bet is that the kid who is asked to do this in the tourney is going to be a lot happier doing it than he would be if his AB ended the tourney for his team.

Yeah, those darn rec kids.... They should just quit so the competitve 8-12 year olds will have more fields to play their tournies on. More fields available so no need for timing the games right? :rolleyes: :bowdown:

[HYP]

True. But the teams don't want to pay more than X to play in the tourney that weekend. Sure it's a bother. I don't like time limits either. But I don't see all the people who don't like time limits putting on their own tourneys without time limits either. Or at least not enough of them at a price people will pay so that it runs the time limit tourneys out of business. No one likes time limits and yet they remain. My thought is, put on your own no time limit tourneys or let it go.

Have and will this year if the fields come through.

Look I understand that in these tournaments that are big have to have time limits. heck I have teams that play in them but that doesn't change the fact that what this coach did, i think is bush.

[AgentX]

Yeah, those darn rec kids.... They should just quit so the competitve 8-12 year olds will have more fields to play their tournies on. More fields available so no need for timing the games right? :rolleyes: :bowdown:
Wow.

That's not even close to what I said or meant.

Don't let that stop you, though.

[Jake Patterson]

So kids under 13 shouldn't play organized baseball? Our LL has similar time rules. Should I tell my son it's not baseball? Time limits in a rec league has a very different connotation to it than someone selling tournament baseball as real baseball. We have talked about this ad nauseum and everyone knows my views on 10U tournaments. Adding time limits says something about how those who run and participate in time limited baseball tournaments. Their perception of the game is about money and trophies not baseball. The game is played by a set of rules that, for the most part have not changed for many years. The need for time limits means somebody is doing something wrong. Either they are trying to jam too much into a specific period of time - which usually, in tournament ball, means money, or the talent level is not what it should be, possibly indicating these players should be home throwing a ball around with dad.

I understand many do not agree with me, but this push to younger tournaments (diaper ball) doesn't help the game IMHO.]

[Mark H]

It's not just the young ones.

[mudvnine]

In all my years of coaching tournament play from 11U through HS, where time limits were used to complete tournaments on time; this is the first time I have ever heard of THIS bush league tactic.

I would have loved for that umpire to just overlook the box violation and let the game continue and then listen to the conniving manager complain about it.

The umpire always has the fallback . . . "Sorry coach, I didn't see it." Ya think the coach is going to go complain to the tournament director?

That coach is definitely more concerned with HIS record and ego then teaching the integrity of the game; what an "A-hole" . . . "diaper ball", I love it Jake!! :rofl: :rofl:

[azmatsfan]

Time limits in a rec league has a very different connotation to it than someone selling tournament baseball as real baseball. We have talked about this ad nauseum and everyone knows my views on 10U tournaments. Adding time limits says something about how those who run and participate in time limited baseball tournaments. Their perception of the game is about money and trophies not baseball. The game is played by a set of rules that, for the most part have not changed for many years. The need for time limits means somebody is doing something wrong. Either they are trying to jam too much into a specific period of time - which usually, in tournament ball, means money, or the talent level is not what it should be, possibly indicating these players should be home throwing a ball around with dad.

I understand many do not agree with me, but this push to younger tournaments (diaper ball) doesn't help the game IMHO.]

I certainly respect your opinion. And I would agree about the time limits if they were regularly used. In my experience a large majority of tournament games finish in time for the teams to take infield before the start of the next game. (With extra innings being the exception.)

[azmatsfan]

This can't possibly be the rule can it? You sure it isn't a "No new inning will be started after the time runs out" rule? If you really have it that way in your league, your league BOD's need to be lined up and shot!! :dismay:

Considering my wife is VP of the board, I don't think I'll suggest the firing line. ;)

In defense of my LL, this was in the Minors division where no official standings are kept. (Although I think every kid in the league knew the record of every other team.) In the Majors division it is a "No new inning" rule except for the late game which has to finish by 9:30 due to City rules concerning the lights.

[Mark H]

In all my years of coaching tournament play from 11U through HS, where time limits were used to complete tournaments on time; this is the first time I have ever heard of THIS bush league tactic.

I would have loved for that umpire to just overlook the box violation and let the game continue and then listen to the conniving manager complain about it.

The umpire always has the fallback . . . "Sorry coach, I didn't see it." Ya think the coach is going to go complain to the tournament director?

That coach is definitely more concerned with HIS record and ego then teaching the integrity of the game; what an "A-hole" . . . "diaper ball", I love it Jake!! :rofl: :rofl:

That would be funny. I like it and I'd buy a ticket to watch the coach's reaction.

So...you guys more mad at the coach who exploited the rule he was given or the money grubbing scrooges who made the rule? ;)

[ipitch]

In all my years of coaching tournament play from 11U through HS, where time limits were used to complete tournaments on time; this is the first time I have ever heard of THIS bush league tactic.

I would have loved for that umpire to just overlook the box violation and let the game continue and then listen to the conniving manager complain about it.

The umpire always has the fallback . . . "Sorry coach, I didn't see it." Ya think the coach is going to go complain to the tournament director?


You say that stepping on the plate is "bush league", and then in your very next sentence you say that you'd love it if an umpire purposely ignored an infraction that he saw (and then lied to the coach) as if that is no big deal!! Do you realize that an umpire purposely making the wrong call is about the worse thing an umpire could do? It's just fine in your book though, eh?

[mudvnine]

You say that stepping on the plate is "bush league", and then in your very next sentence you say that you'd love it if an umpire purposely ignored an infraction that he saw (and then lied to the coach) as if that is no big deal!! Do you realize that an umpire purposely making the wrong call is about the worse thing an umpire could do? It's just fine in your book though, eh?

Yes pitch, an umpire purposely ignoring a bush league play THAT IS BROUGHT TO HIS ATTENTION BY AN "A-HOLE" COACH is perfectly fine in "my books". :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

If you want to teach your 10-year old ball players to go out there and purposely make an out that's your business; but I'd rather teach my players to strive for excellence and attempt to succeed regardless of the situation.

Sometimes in youth baseball, it's OK to put the betterment of an individual player ahead of the team as a whole; especially when it comes to teaching that we must strive for success even in the face of adversity. Sure would have been something if that kid got a hit and it led to one of those two out rallies that are so fun to see in baseball, but I guess you and that coach, just don't have that kind of faith in your players.

If you bungle raising your children (or ball players), I don't think whatever else you do well matters very much (like winning a 10U ball game).

[AgentX]

If you want to teach your 10-year old ball players to go out there and purposely make an out that's your business; but I'd rather teach my players to strive for excellence and attempt to succeed regardless of the situation.

I'm sure if you ask the coach of the team in question, he'd tell you that's exactly what he was doing.

Having seen tourneys and teams like this, this move doesn't surprise me. It's not the kind of thing I would do, but it's not at all surprising coming from a competitive team in the semi-final round of a tournament. What IS surprising to me is all of the outrage it's garnered here. You'd think it was the worst thing that ever happened to baseball.

Oh, I forgot. A 10U time-limited tourney doesn't qualify as "baseball."

So I guess we're really just here to air out our issues with youth sports.

I not a big fan of ultra-competitive baseball for 10yos. But some people are. Some people are willing to compete for parking spaces or speed up just so they don't get passed on the freeway. I've seen teams at many different levels criticized for not being competitive enough. Believe it or not, having junior learn to compete is one of the reasons many parents shell out to put him/her in youth sports. It's a competitive world. Better learn early.

There are all sorts of noncompetitive options for kids, especially at the age of 10. There's the YMCA or plenty of other rec programs that encourage sportsmanship and teamwork and many don't even bother to keep score.

But that's not the program these kids were playing in. They were playing on a competitive team in a competitive tournament where the goal is not to learn the warm fuzzies of baseball, but rather to win. For some, that's all there is.

[jofus]

At this point, if I told you 2+2 was 4, I'm sure you'd try really hard to disagree with me.

How about the hidden-ball trick, letting a ball drop untouched in order to turn a double play, acting like you caught a ball when you know that you trapped it, etc? Are these unsportsmanlike too?


My 10 year old son was catching in his little league game last night, and tagged a runner out at home, but the ball came out of his glove when the boy slid into the play. The ump (we have coaches of the other game of the night umping, several of them, including this one, are very inexperienced) called the boy out and kinda turned away, so he didn't see our pitcher pick the ball up from under the baserunner.

The other team's fans started yelling "he dropped the ball, he dropped the ball", and I saw my son look up at the ump and say "I did drop the ball, he was safe."

We're gonna work on holding onto the ball, but I like the sportsmanship. The game ended up a tie, so it was a pretty big run.



On a related note, my DD's team was playing in a fastpitch tournament this weekend, and in the 5th inning we were down a few runs and there was only a few minutes left on the clock. Amazingly, the other teams pitcher got dirt in her eye after the first out, and it took her coaches 3 trips to the mound to take care of it, the last one with a bottle of saline solution which the coach literally chased her around the infield with, with her backing up and saying "I'm OK, it's not bothering me, I don't need that".

Bless his heart, he was concerned about her though, he kept trying to catch her to help her get the dirt out of her eye.

Almost made me tear up, it was so touching.

[HYP]

I'm sure if you ask the coach of the team in question, he'd tell you that's exactly what he was doing.

Having seen tourneys and teams like this, this move doesn't surprise me. It's not the kind of thing I would do, but it's not at all surprising coming from a competitive team in the semi-final round of a tournament. What IS surprising to me is all of the outrage it's garnered here. You'd think it was the worst thing that ever happened to baseball.

Oh, I forgot. A 10U time-limited tourney doesn't qualify as "baseball."

So I guess we're really just here to air out our issues with youth sports.

I not a big fan of ultra-competitive baseball for 10yos. But some people are. Some people are willing to compete for parking spaces or speed up just so they don't get passed on the freeway. I've seen teams at many different levels criticized for not being competitive enough. Believe it or not, having junior learn to compete is one of the reasons many parents shell out to put him/her in youth sports. It's a competitive world. Better learn early.

There are all sorts of noncompetitive options for kids, especially at the age of 10. There's the YMCA or plenty of other rec programs that encourage sportsmanship and teamwork and many don't even bother to keep score.

But that's not the program these kids were playing in. They were playing on a competitive team in a competitive tournament where the goal is not to learn the warm fuzzies of baseball, but rather to win. For some, that's all there is.


I run travel teams for an academy. These parents pay for their kids to play. They try out and if they make it, they have monthly dues. The reason they are there is not to just win. It is first and foremost to get quality instruction, from professionals. Then to be on a team that can compete and possibly win.

I can guarantee you if I pulled this bush league crap with one of my teams. I would lose all credibility with my players and the parents of those players and I would go home and not be able to look myself in the mirror.

[AgentX]

I run travel teams for an academy. These parents pay for their kids to play. They try out and if they make it, they have monthly dues. The reason they are there is not to just win. It is first and foremost to get quality instruction, from professionals. Then to be on a team that can compete and possibly win.

I can guarantee you if I pulled this bush league crap with one of my teams. I would lose all credibility with my players and the parents of those players and I would go home and not be able to look myself in the mirror.

Nor could I, but your experience is by no means universal. Certainly you're aware of travel teams that are sought after by both parents and players because they are so ultra-competitive. Frankly, I'm glad that parents/kids like that have places to go so that they're less likely to end up in rec or on travel teams that stress instruction over victory.

My point is only that this is what to expect from tournament play at youth tournaments, and it's unlikely to change regardless of what kind of outrage manifests here.

So many parents just don't get it. Youth baseball is just a step in the process, it is not the destination. I think that too often parents get so caught up in trying to insure that junior has a "positive experience" in baseball that they disregard all of the great life lessons that come out of playing a game that is really all about failure. They convince themselves that their kid will fall apart if his team loses a big game, but that's either their own problem, or the kid desperately NEEDS to lose in order to learn how to cope with the curves that life is going to throw him.

As one who is worried about what would become of your own credibility if you were to pull something like this, perhaps you can imagine how this coach may have felt the need to do something to defend his. Right or wrong, it is ultimately up to the parents and players on his team to decide if they want to be coached by him.

[scorekeeper]

… The line of the batters box is 6 inches from the plate. Or should be....

Loved the spirit of your post, and heartily agree. But I can’t help take just a teeny weeny shot. The 6” is for a 60/90 field. For a 46/60, which many 10YO’s play on, its 4”. To tell the truth, I’ve never set up any of the goofy sized fields, so I can’t say for certain what they are. However, I do know the height of the rubber changes according to the distance of the mound, so I’m gonna guess the distance from the batter’s box to the plate changes too.

;)

[scorekeeper]

this can't possibly be the rule can it? You sure it isn't a "no new inning will be started after the time runs out" rule? If you really have it that way in your league, your league bod's need to be lined up and shot!! :dismay:

hear hear!!!!!!

[MrUmpireSir]

Loved the spirit of your post, and heartily agree. But I can’t help take just a teeny weeny shot. The 6” is for a 60/90 field. For a 46/60, which many 10YO’s play on, its 4”. To tell the truth, I’ve never set up any of the goofy sized fields, so I can’t say for certain what they are. However, I do know the height of the rubber changes according to the distance of the mound, so I’m gonna guess the distance from the batter’s box to the plate changes too.

;)

This is why all umpires have immense love and respect for Official Scorers! Their attention to detail is unsurpassed, and anyone who can understand Rule 10 is always aces in our book!

[scorekeeper]

Time limits in a rec league has a very different connotation to it than someone selling tournament baseball as real baseball. We have talked about this ad nauseum and everyone knows my views on 10U tournaments. Adding time limits says something about how those who run and participate in time limited baseball tournaments. Their perception of the game is about money and trophies not baseball. The game is played by a set of rules that, for the most part have not changed for many years. The need for time limits means somebody is doing something wrong. Either they are trying to jam too much into a specific period of time - which usually, in tournament ball, means money, or the talent level is not what it should be, possibly indicating these players should be home throwing a ball around with dad.

I understand many do not agree with me, but this push to younger tournaments (diaper ball) doesn't help the game IMHO.]

What happened to the list of tie breakers about a foot long that we used to get when my son was doing tournaments 10 years ago? In almost all the tournaments I remember, you got 6 or 7 innings, whatever constituted a “normal” game length, then you stopped. If you went to 30 minutes prior to the next game’s start time, the game stopped, then reverted to the last full inning.

If there was no winner, it didn’t matter. The tournament committee would start going down the list of teams, and when they got to ties, out would come the tie breaker list. The craziest I ever saw was us losing because we had fewer base runners reach 1st safely. The other team had 3 that reached on FC’s and we only had 1.

[AgentX]

What happened to the list of tie breakers about a foot long that we used to get when my son was doing tournaments 10 years ago? In almost all the tournaments I remember, you got 6 or 7 innings, whatever constituted a “normal” game length, then you stopped. If you went to 30 minutes prior to the next game’s start time, the game stopped, then reverted to the last full inning.

If there was no winner, it didn’t matter. The tournament committee would start going down the list of teams, and when they got to ties, out would come the tie breaker list. The craziest I ever saw was us losing because we had fewer base runners reach 1st safely. The other team had 3 that reached on FC’s and we only had 1.
...and then they invented the wheel, and everything changed!

So instead of managers having to manage the clock, they got to worry about how many runs they could squeeze in against the weaker teams. Got it.

The problem isn't the rules.

[scorekeeper]

...and then they invented the wheel, and everything changed!

So instead of managers having to manage the clock, they got to worry about how many runs they could squeeze in against the weaker teams. Got it.

The problem isn't the rules.

If you weren’t into the tournament/travel/select scene 10 or more years ago, you couldn’t possibly believe the difference between then and when tournament/travel/select began to gain a strong following and then, and then to what the tournament/travel/select scene is now.

Here’s the deal. The fewer teams there are, the more “select” the players and the teams are. 10 years ago, we were just at the point where those teams were beginning to proliferate, so for the most part, when you’d go to a tournament, virtually all the teams were pretty studly. So, while there were the occasional mercy games, for the most part it was two pretty darn good teams beating heck out of each other.

Now though, the chances are at least a third of the teams entered in most tournaments don’t belong with the big boys. Rather than chose teams based on their quality, the game was to lock up teams to get the entrance fees, and let them get their heads handed to ‘em in pool play.

Heck, the Anderson bat tournament this year was supposed to be nothing but elite teams from all over the country. But there was at least on team there, I think from Utah, that had only played 1 or 2 games by that time, and they got smoked. Why? Because there were about 6 million tournaments going on around that same time, and there were good teams playing in all of them rather than all the good teams in one spot.

My point is, when the competition was more equal, a manger could try all he wanted to score 30 runs in a game before the mercy was invoked, but it was seldom that it could be done.

[AgentX]

My point is, when the competition was more equal, a manger could try all he wanted to score 30 runs in a game before the mercy was invoked, but it was seldom that it could be done.
So what?

The impetus is still there. Just as it is with time management. The bottom line is that if you make a part of the game important, teams will treat it with importance. Seems pretty obvious.

And while it may well have been "more select" a decade ago, that just means that fewer kids got to play. I have trouble seeing that as a good thing.

More teams means more competition. It's undoubtedly watered down from the awesome skillz of a decade ago, but better players who want to play on better teams tend to find them, and those teams tend to find each other, often in the semis at a tournament.

[HYP]

Nor could I, but your experience is by no means universal. Certainly you're aware of travel teams that are sought after by both parents and players because they are so ultra-competitive. Frankly, I'm glad that parents/kids like that have places to go so that they're less likely to end up in rec or on travel teams that stress instruction over victory.

My point is only that this is what to expect from tournament play at youth tournaments, and it's unlikely to change regardless of what kind of outrage manifests here.

So many parents just don't get it. Youth baseball is just a step in the process, it is not the destination. I think that too often parents get so caught up in trying to insure that junior has a "positive experience" in baseball that they disregard all of the great life lessons that come out of playing a game that is really all about failure. They convince themselves that their kid will fall apart if his team loses a big game, but that's either their own problem, or the kid desperately NEEDS to lose in order to learn how to cope with the curves that life is going to throw him.

As one who is worried about what would become of your own credibility if you were to pull something like this, perhaps you can imagine how this coach may have felt the need to do something to defend his. Right or wrong, it is ultimately up to the parents and players on his team to decide if they want to be coached by him.

i understand what you are saying.

i have coached at an academy that was ultra competitve. Where people were on waiting lists to get on a team. Not only were they on waiting lists, they were on the waiting list to pay over 500 a month so thier kid could play on the team. The reason they were on waiting lists is because we taught the kids to play the game. We made them better and by learning the game and beating the game we would win.

I do agree with you that no matter how terrible I think what this coach did will change anything. But it doesn't change the fact that I think it is not right.

[Rajun Cajun]

I had no idea this topic would spark such a spirited debate.

I have learned much from all of the responses and I am better for it.

I also know how to defeat this tactic should (or when) I see it again. I don't care one way or the other. If a coach does this to me fine, that's part of the game I suppose. I now have 2 plans of action that I can insert should I smell something funny brewing.

1. Talk to the umpire and try and confirm the conversation that just took place. If I do, I will throw to the batter, watch him do it, and then get the tournament director to DQ the team.

2. Walk the kid and throw over to first base a whole bunch. When time expires, pitch to the batter and get a strike out, or a force at first or second.


I may not be able to defeat or prevent the tactic, but I do reserve the right to mount a defense against it in some way.

[Jake Patterson]

If I come back in my next life as a college or professional head coach - Scorekeeper will be the first phone call I make.
Jake

[AgentX]

2. Walk the kid and throw over to first base a whole bunch. When time expires, pitch to the batter and get a strike out, or a force at first or second.

Is this any better?

Honestly, I prefer the other coach's FF tactic to intentionally stalling out the clock.

[davewashere]

I had no idea this topic would spark such a spirited debate.

I have learned much from all of the responses and I am better for it.

I also know how to defeat this tactic should (or when) I see it again. I don't care one way or the other. If a coach does this to me fine, that's part of the game I suppose. I now have 2 plans of action that I can insert should I smell something funny brewing.

1. Talk to the umpire and try and confirm the conversation that just took place. If I do, I will throw to the batter, watch him do it, and then get the tournament director to DQ the team.

2. Walk the kid and throw over to first base a whole bunch. When time expires, pitch to the batter and get a strike out, or a force at first or second.


I may not be able to defeat or prevent the tactic, but I do reserve the right to mount a defense against it in some way.

Walking the batter isn't an option, because he can just run around the bases and score or get tagged out for the final out of the inning (which is what he was trying to do at the plate anyway). At most, walking him delays the end of the inning by the same amount of time it might take him to round the bases, which is maybe 20 seconds (assuming you give the ball to the catcher and wait until he's coming home to tag him out).

[bbb3601]

This happened to us a few years ago. Now mind you I don't know if it is a rule or not so bear with me. We were in a tournament (yeah I know) and the catcher on the opposing team purposely (yes it was) dropped a called third strike in order to start a double play..we had a runner on first. I was sitting in the stands and everyone was complaining. Is this allowed or was it bush. I cant remember what the coach's and higher ups claimed, but reading all of this made me remember.

[hitnpeas]

I seriously doubt that the kid had a problem with it. IME, kids in the semis of a select tourney will do anything they can to keep their chances afloat. These are competitive players, not runny-nosed rec kids who are playing just because mom wants them to make friends.



Yeah, those darn rec kids.... They should just quit so the competitve 8-12 year olds will have more fields to play their tournies on. More fields available so no need for timing the games right? :rolleyes: :bowdown:

Wow.

That's not even close to what I said or meant.

Don't let that stop you, though.

Maybe not what you MEANT but it is pretty much what you SAID! Maybe Freud had something to do with it. lol.... Fwiw, my comments may have had a touch of sarcasm laced in.

[AgentX]

Not at all.

Those are YOUR issues, not mine.

I see roles for both rec and travel. My kids play both. I coach in both. One is not more deserving of field time than another, period. In fact, I'm more in favor of giving field time to rec leagues than to travel, as that is where the love of the game is actually cultivated.

My point is that the kids who play select travel are generally kids who really, really want to play. I can't say the same about all of the rec league kids I've seen. This doesn't mean that the same drive can't be there, only that it is less likely to be there.

[hitnpeas]

Not at all.

Those are YOUR issues, not mine.

I see roles for both rec and travel. My kids play both. I coach in both. One is not more deserving of field time than another, period. In fact, I'm more in favor of giving field time to rec leagues than to travel, as that is where the love of the game is actually cultivated.

My point is that the kids who play select travel are generally kids who really, really want to play. I can't say the same about all of the rec league kids I've seen. This doesn't mean that the same drive can't be there, only that it is less likely to be there.

What issues are mine again? lol. Just commenting on what you wrote.... I get it that you have a different stance than what you originally WROTE, but just about the time you make a post I agree with, you throw in a comment like you did above. :confused:

Peace!!

[HYP]

This happened to us a few years ago. Now mind you I don't know if it is a rule or not so bear with me. We were in a tournament (yeah I know) and the catcher on the opposing team purposely (yes it was) dropped a called third strike in order to start a double play..we had a runner on first. I was sitting in the stands and everyone was complaining. Is this allowed or was it bush. I cant remember what the coach's and higher ups claimed, but reading all of this made me remember.

Please explain how this started a double play.

[hitnpeas]

Please explain how this started a double play.

I was thinking the same thing....If the base was occupied he (the batter) couldn't run right? :confused:

[MrUmpireSir]

This happened to us a few years ago. Now mind you I don't know if it is a rule or not so bear with me. We were in a tournament (yeah I know) and the catcher on the opposing team purposely (yes it was) dropped a called third strike in order to start a double play..we had a runner on first. I was sitting in the stands and everyone was complaining. Is this allowed or was it bush. I cant remember what the coach's and higher ups claimed, but reading all of this made me remember.

If there was a runner on first, and the batter was allowed to run on the D3K, then there were, by rule, 2 out. No double play was possible. If there were less than 2 out, the batter was out on Strike 3, regardless of whether or not the pitch was caught.

[AgentX]

What issues are mine again? lol. Just commenting on what you wrote.... I get it that you have a different stance than what you originally WROTE, but just about the time you make a post I agree with, you throw in a comment like you did above. :confused:

Peace!!

How is that what I wrote?

[bbb3601]

Well I just called a parent who was on that team as well, and this is what he said. Again mind you it was some time ago, and I dont claim to know rules etc. He said that this team had a history of instead of gloving a called third strike with a runner on first the coach would have them drop it on purpose. Usually the runner on first would break for two...catcher throws to second 1 out on to first out two. He told me that this coach did this because (his kid played with them in the past) most kids will try to steal if ball hits the ground and it is an easy dp?

[AgentX]

Well I just called a parent who was on that team as well, and this is what he said. Again mind you it was some time ago, and I dont claim to know rules etc. He said that this team had a history of instead of gloving a called third strike with a runner on first the coach would have them drop it on purpose. Usually the runner on first would break for two...catcher throws to second 1 out on to first out two. He told me that this coach did this because (his kid played with them in the past) most kids will try to steal if ball hits the ground and it is an easy dp?

You can't steal first if it's occupied.

[hitnpeas]

How is that what I wrote?

You wrote the comment about snot nosed rec kids although I guess technically you typed it. You came back and justified what you said. I guess something was lost in the translation and I understand your position. I quoted what you typed if you want to back and look. I don't know what more you are looking for.... Your question above makes my head hurt!! :ughh


No worries, carry on....

[AgentX]

That's it!

I'm stepping on home plate now...


ON PURPOSE! :D

[bbb3601]

Thus the argument if you are stealing second and so on. They went on about it for a few minutes. Their coach was thrown out of a future game from arguing it when the umpire didnt allow it. I just wondered if it was a judgement call if the runner seems to be stealing or a blown call or a rule violation or just bad luck I dont know thats why I asked.. The parent I called said he has the game dvd so he is going to look at it again when he gets home and try to mail a portion of it to me. If he does I will share because I barely remember it...two years ago.

[AgentX]

Thus the argument if you are stealing second and so on. They went on about it for a few minutes. Their coach was thrown out of a future game from arguing it when the umpire didnt allow it. I just wondered if it was a judgement call if the runner seems to be stealing or a blown call or a rule violation or just bad luck I dont know thats why I asked.. The parent I called said he has the game dvd so he is going to look at it again when he gets home and try to mail a portion of it to me. If he does I will share because I barely remember it...two years ago.

Unless I'm mistaken, whether the runner on 1st is stealing or not is beside the point. Unless he successfully steals on the pitch before, he is technically occupying first when the dropped 3rd strike occurs.

[MrUmpireSir]

Unless I'm mistaken, whether the runner on 1st is stealing or not is beside the point. Unless he successfully steals on the pitch before, he is technically occupying first when the dropped 3rd strike occurs.

Agent X is not mistaken. R1 stealing occupies 1B for the purposes of this rule. Batter's out.

[bbb3601]

Thank you for explaining the rule. Maybe this umpire didn't understand it or whatever. I am just telling you what happened. This was at 9 so for all I know it could have been a parent calling the game. From what I understand (from other parent) this is what the argument was about...the rule you all stated.

[scorekeeper]

So what?

The impetus is still there. Just as it is with time management. The bottom line is that if you make a part of the game important, teams will treat it with importance. Seems pretty obvious.

Exactly. And putting a clock on the game makes something important that was never considered in the original rules.

And while it may well have been "more select" a decade ago, that just means that fewer kids got to play. I have trouble seeing that as a good thing.

Horse pucky! Just as many kids got to play, but fewer played in that environment.

More teams means more competition. It's undoubtedly watered down from the awesome skillz of a decade ago, but better players who want to play on better teams tend to find them, and those teams tend to find each other, often in the semis at a tournament.

You and I certainly don’t seem to have the same definition for competitive. To me, all it means is that the two teams are pretty much equal, so a team of stinkos playing another team of stinkos could be an extremely competitive situation, and certainly more competitive than a team of studs playing a team of duds.

I don’t think they do find them for the most part. If there’s 8 teams in an area, they all can’t get the best players. Those players will generally spread out to the teams closest to where they live, and then to the teams they feel they can get the most playing time on, and not necessarily in that order.

Your picture of the “best” teams finding themselves in the semi’s at tournaments shows how silly the whole thing is. Rather than start with 32 teams in pool play and having the beat 8 move into the semis, why not just do away with the pool play and start with the 12 best teams that could be found? That way every game would mean a lot more, even if there were ultimately fewer games each team played.

[AgentX]

Your picture of the “best” teams finding themselves in the semi’s at tournaments shows how silly the whole thing is. Rather than start with 32 teams in pool play and having the beat 8 move into the semis, why not just do away with the pool play and start with the 12 best teams that could be found? That way every game would mean a lot more, even if there were ultimately fewer games each team played.
And thus, fewer kids get to play. See how that works?

Exactly. And putting a clock on the game makes something important that was never considered in the original rules. You mean the ones that Moses brought down on granite slabs or the ones that the tournament directors laid out before they sent out the invitations?

You and I certainly don’t seem to have the same definition for competitive. To me, all it means is that the two teams are pretty much equal, so a team of stinkos playing another team of stinkos could be an extremely competitive situation, and certainly more competitive than a team of studs playing a team of duds.

I don’t think they do find them for the most part. If there’s 8 teams in an area, they all can’t get the best players. Those players will generally spread out to the teams closest to where they live, and then to the teams they feel they can get the most playing time on, and not necessarily in that order.

I think the real problem is that we have a different definition of "stinkos."

You seem to feel that travel ball should be open only to a privileged few who have demonstrated some uncanny ability to play great baseball without the benefit of programs that develop it.

I don't think that makes much sense. At least here in SoFla, travel is where skills in promising players are developed. A half-decent 10yo LL player can find a travel team and build up skill that they will never get from rec programs. Perhaps the extra work and competition will help them earn a spot on their rec AS team, perhaps they will just continue in travel because it's more like the baseball they see on TV. But just because they don't qualify as elite, it doesn't mean they love baseball less, or should have less opportunity to play.

I suppose that if you're caught up in teams having the BEST PLAYERS so that they can CRUSH AND DOMINATE AND WIN or whatever you think is important for 12 year old kids to do, then I could see your point. But what do I know. I'm probably mistaken in thinking that youth ball is about developing skill, character, and fostering a love of the game.