How would you handle?

[UmpJM]

It's really pretty cut and dried:

(d) Each umpire has authority to disqualify any player, coach, manager or substitute for

objecting to decisions or for unsportsmanlike conduct or language, and to eject such

disqualified person from the playing field. If an umpire disqualifies a player while a

play is in progress, the disqualification shall not take effect until no further action is

possible in that play.

Cactus' entire mistaken argument is based on the fallacious logic that since a player/manager "shall" be ejected for leaving his position to argue a call (balls and strikes), that it is required that he leave his position to be properly ejected for arguing any judgement call under the rules.

Utter nonsense.

JM

[NFUA_44]

It's really pretty cut and dried:

(d) Each umpire has authority to disqualify any player, coach, manager or substitute for

objecting to decisions or for unsportsmanlike conduct or language, and to eject such

disqualified person from the playing field. If an umpire disqualifies a player while a

play is in progress, the disqualification shall not take effect until no further action is

possible in that play.

Cactus' entire mistaken argument is based on the fallacious logic that since a player/manager "shall" be ejected for leaving his position to argue a call, that is is required that he leave his position to be properly ejected under the rules.

Utter nonsense.

JM

Thanks JM,

Is that from the MLBUM? That's one I've never gotten around to. Got J/R, Maximizing, Wendlested, JEA, and BRD, should probably hunt one down, I usually just use my JEA since it's digital and easily searched.

[UmpJM]

NFUA,

No, it's the verbatim text of OBR 9.01(d).

JM

[UmpJeff]

Wow! There goes 20 minutes of my life I'll never get back. I'm sure Cactus has thick skin (no pun intended) to take all the abuse he must get.

Every pre-game conference I have with the coaches includes the following: "there are six things we will neither hear about nor discuss...ball/strike, fair/foul, safe/out". Most coaches, in my experience, understand what that means. Those that don't usually end up watching the game from the parking lot.

[UmpJM]

...

Every pre-game conference I have with the coaches includes the following: "there are six things we will neither hear about nor discuss...ball/strike, fair/foul, safe/out". Most coaches, in my experience, understand what that means. Those that don't usually end up watching the game from the parking lot.

UmpJeff,

Some things are best left unsaid.

I would no sooner say that than I would, "We'll be playing with 3 strikes and 4 balls today".

JM

[yawetag]

Every pre-game conference I have with the coaches includes the following: "there are six things we will neither hear about nor discuss...ball/strike, fair/foul, safe/out". Most coaches, in my experience, understand what that means. Those that don't usually end up watching the game from the parking lot.

Jeff, I'd take this phrase out of your pre-game. For one, it's not required. Secondly, it puts the bug in the coaches' ears that maybe you're not sure you'll make all the calls correctly.

[Cactus]

Cactus' entire mistaken argument is based on the fallacious logic that since a player/manager "shall" be ejected for leaving his position to argue a call (balls and strikes), that it is required that he leave his position to be properly ejected for arguing any judgement call under the rules.

Utter nonsense.

JM

My argument is that the rules are not different for arguing ball/strike or out/safe. A lot of TV announcers will say "you can't argue balls and strike, that is an automatic ejection" but that is just not correct, and it has seemed like some of you on this website believe them. Someone yelling from the dugout "that pitch isn't up" is the same as him yelling "he was out", it is not an automatic ejection.

[NFUA_44]

Cactus' entire mistaken argument is based on the fallacious logic that since a player/manager "shall" be ejected for leaving his position to argue a call (balls and strikes), that it is required that he leave his position to be properly ejected for arguing any judgement call under the rules.

Utter nonsense.

JM

My argument is that the rules are not different for arguing ball/strike or out/safe. A lot of TV announcers will say "you can't argue balls and strike, that is an automatic ejection" but that is just not correct, and it has seemed like some of you on this website believe them. Someone yelling from the dugout "that pitch isn't up" is the same as him yelling "he was out", it is not an automatic ejection.

Cactus,

Please take the time to read. You are speaking in generalities, and trying to paint everyone with a broad brush, when several people have told you specifically how it is handled in the real world every day. This wasn't about TV announcers, it was about the OP (originally), and devolved into you demanding that the rules do not support an ejection for arguing balls/strikes or other judgment calls. Most everyone that responded to you gave you citations from accepted Rules book and/or manuals, and you provided a statement that something didn't appear in one source, still never having provided the actual text from that source. You were wrong then, your wrong now, deal with it.

[mstaylor]

Wow! There goes 20 minutes of my life I'll never get back. I'm sure Cactus has thick skin (no pun intended) to take all the abuse he must get.

Every pre-game conference I have with the coaches includes the following: "there are six things we will neither hear about nor discuss...ball/strike, fair/foul, safe/out". Most coaches, in my experience, understand what that means. Those that don't usually end up watching the game from the parking lot.

I would drop the six things from your pregame. It presents an air of unapproachability and animosity that shouldn't be there. I don't even like telling coaches to come talk to the calling umpire if they have a question. Whle showing you are approachable and warns coaches to come screaming at you, it sets up a thought of being able to question everything.

Cautus:

You seem to not to be able to destinguish between chirping and arguing balls and strikes. Chhirping is tolerated to a point, then shut down, then ejected for. Coming out to argue balls and strikes is going to get you tossed 99.9% of the time. Arguing safes/outs will get you tossed quite a bit, but many times there legitament questions that can be asked about a safe/out. If they just are arguing for the sake of arguing then it most times lead to an ejection.