Cato the Younger

This is an interesting twist to the rule change. You are correct this is from the Fed press release this summer to confirm the post above regarding 3-3-1: "Also part of the modification to Rule 3-3-1 Penalty, coaches who receive a written warning (Rule 10-2-3) will be restricted to the bench and/or dugout for the remainder of the game." “The new rule change has initiated a penalty progression, starting with a written warning, restriction to the bench/dugout and subsequent ejection from the contest,” said Elliot Hopkins, NFHS director of sports and student services and liaison to the Baseball Rules Committee." The way I first read it I had it as first a written warning...then restriction....... then ejection.

You know why I am so proud to be an umpire is exactly this discussion. Coaches are reacting on "Monkey Tilt!!!!!! and as an umpire we are examing if using "This is your warning for the rest of the game. or..... If you continue to __________, then you will be ejected." is better then "knock it off" with a coach acting like a complete jack a** for game management! I once told a coach to knock it off, or he would be on the bus. After I had ejected him for arguing balls and strikes among other goofy behavior, he proceeded to climb on top the hood of a full-sized school bus and yell at me about 100 yards from the field. The coach pleaded ignorance to understanding what "knock it off" meant for his game status to a wonderful old man who was a retired AD and the Conference Commissioner that hired me to work the game. He told the coach " Your, a good coach but if I were your AD, I would consider firing you for thinking that I am so stupid to think you didn't understand what this young man meant while you were making an ass out of yourself. And that was before you climbed on the bus." He made the coach apologise to me and moved me to the coaches next game. I miss that man dearly we need more like him. I think these are all sound ideas but don't think for one minute that "knock it off" or "that's enough" is not a sufficient warning because the coach is unclear what it means. The only question that remains is if he can get a parting shot or two or three before going bye-bye depending on the umpire.

Well, the wind is favorable. I wanted a Carlucci and should have invested in one before we lost Cece. I will take a flyer. Thanks Guys!

Well in 2016 by Federation Rule you may be partially correct. But to be fully accurate in 2016 in highschool baseball you should be saying, "This is your warning, if you continue you will be restricted to the dugout." So even the lay of the land has changed for you. It's warn /restrict/and then eject world in 2016 according to the good committee which seem to think this rule change is promoting good sportsmanship. Water down a game control rule and that is going to encourage coaches to behave better???????? I don't get the logic. Maybe this thread was not such a good idea for the new guy around here to start. I am not trolling and really like my posting about umpiring to be positive. But this rule change struck a cord as well as your post. I have deep respect for all umpires and the decisions they make on the field but I strongly disagree with the statement you made above and fully admit to ejecting a coach without a warning on a number of occasions......... and not only with insulting me or making physical contact. Using the phrase "This is your warning, if you continue you will be ejected." as you suggest above would have been a huge mistake in game control philosophy in many of those situations in my opinion. I consider myself a moderate with game control not a "Red A** but I also absolutely disagree with the NFL mode of operation where if someone says something inappropriate you ask them if the care to repeat the comment........ and if they do then flag them. That is a Marshmellow approach to game control which sadly is becoming more and more common in umpiring......... not only in philosophy but now by rule. Some behaviors do not deserve a get out of jail free card even when they are not blatant.

I appreciate what you guys are saying, and I realize that a warning is not required. “Coaches can still be ejected on a first offense if it is deemed to be major.” Quoting my OP from above. The problem is when this is covered as a rule change with the coaches next spring many coaches are going to interpret this as a should be warned before being ejected situation. The ruthless reality is many coaches (I work with a bunch of them in an administrative capacity beyond umpiring) don’t think they are that far out of line when many umpires think that they are well over the line. Here’s the scenario I’m most concerned about. There is a close play.....Coach "Tasmanian Devil" comes flying out of the dugout protesting the call. The umpire has had enough but has not issued a formal warning throws coach Taz out of the game. Coach Taz goes back to his athletic director and says: "This guy must have been yelled at by his wife as he had rabbit ears. I was supposed to receive a warning. I didn’t swear at the official. It was a terrible call. He should not have thrown me out of the game. It a shame that guys like that are getting paid with that brutal of a call. Blah blah blah.......Now the umpire who had a perfectly legitimate ejection is now defending why he did not give a warning to his assigner. If he’s lucky enough to have a supportive assigner no problem. But there’s a lot of athletic directors and assignors that I know that are company men and women that would throw the umpire under the bus in support coach Taz not getting his warning.

They are. My biggest concern is that it's a Douglas not a Wilson West Vest. It looks like it will work but it's not actually a model listed on the Website. Do you have one? If so how do you like it?

I'm sorry if this is been covered in a different thread still getting my bearings around here. I'm thinking about asking my family to send my chest protector to Team Wendy to get retrofitted with their pads for Christmas. It's an old Douglas West Vest that I actually bought from Joe West at Jim Evans is Academy a professional umpiring in the early 90s. I digress. Has anybody sent their chest protector to Team Wendy and had the padding put in? If so how do you like it?

Maybe even Jocko Conlon would have put his balloon aside for this rig!

BTW did you ever get the Titanium Rawlings mask with the TW pads? If so how do you like it?

LOL - He is Old school, fortunately, he is an amazing umpire even though he has lost a step. He is sensitive in his advanced years, but the one thing that he completely remains insensitive to is his lack of adopting technology into his officiating. For example, he refuses to interact with things like Arbiter. Fortunately, I pick up the slack there but there does remain challenges when you’re baseball, and softball partner does not do email. I don't even have a way to send him a text lol.

@ grayhawk - BTW I love your handle!

I am surprised that there is not a thread about the Federation baseball rule change for 2016 which I am not a fan of. Beginning with the 2016 season, umpires will be required to issue a warning to coaches before restriction to the bench/dugout or ejecting them as part of a new penalty progression to promote preventive officiating. The revision to Rule 3-3-1 Penalty was one of two changes recommended by the NFHS Baseball Rules Committee at its June 7-9 meeting. Previously, issuing a warning to an offending coach was optional for umpires, who will now restrict to the bench/dugout or eject coaches who commit a violation after previously being warned for a minor offense. However, coaches can still be ejected on a first offense if it is deemed to be major. Also part of the modification to Rule 3-3-1 Penalty, coaches who receive a written warning (Rule 10-2-3) will be restricted to the bench and/or dugout for the remainder of the game. “The new rule change has initiated a penalty progression, starting with a written warning, restriction to the bench/dugout and subsequent ejection from the contest,” said Elliot Hopkins, NFHS director of sports and student services and liaison to the Baseball Rules Committee. The changes to Rule 3-3-1 Penalty will help to de-escalate contentious situations and allow coaches to dictate their status in the game by their behavior, Hopkins said. “A successful game official practices preventive officiating, and this new penalty progression will allow the official to issue penalties that give the coach the opportunity to remain in the game and teach his players.” Mr. Hopkins some of these coaches (clowns) should not have "the opportunity to remain in the game and teach his players.” I wonder how many of you plan on adjusting game management with this rule change? I can hear some of the biggest offenders thinking they now get a free shot. "Are you not suppose to give me a warning" Sure you can still give the hook right away but I think it will put the ejection under more scrutiny than in the past.

I am interested in that mask too! Any idea of how durable the Aluminum is compared to steel and titanium? Ump-atire claims it's lighter than titanium mask I am also thinking about pairing these with TW pads and maybe give one to my partner as a Christmas gift.

Dusty summer days will be hard on the mesh. I am glad you guys are posting about the NEW - New Balance shoes as I am shopping for base shoes now. My last pair of patent leather Mizuno's that I got in 1991 and was the issued umpire shoe in the Pacific League back then. The actual shoes worn by the umpires in the Pacific League were white. I bought six pairs of black when they stopped making them. My last pair bit the dust working football this fall. I loved those shoes, but it will be nice to get something more modern for cushioning.

So did anyone take a flyer on the daveystrap? funny thread one of the reasons I joined.