Charged Conference

[jjskitours]

For whatever reason, a coach from the dugout requests and is granted time. He then stands and gives a number of signs to his catcher. Is this considered a charged conference since he did request time and it was clear he was communicating with a defensive player through his signs? I realize this would be highly unusual, but by rule what do you have.

[mstaylor]

I wouldn't but tell him that isn't happening again

[Dannytheman]

At this time of year, I might hit him with a visit.  I hate calling time for stupidity.

Kids ask for time now at every opportunity. Coaches scream it.  It's an epidemic. 

[noumpere]

Not a conference.  I think theres a specific HS case play on this (but I don't have the books here -- maybe I can get to them later today)

[mstaylor]

Not a conference but I certainly will tell him that I am not calling time so he can give signals. 

[JaxRolo]

Not a conference but I certainly will tell him that I am not calling time so he can give signals. 

+1

 

Not a visit.

[Mad Mike]

NFHS Defininition of a conference 2-10-1:

 

A charged conference is a meeting which involves the coach or his non-playing representative and a player or players of the team. 

 

Further rule guidance is given in 3-4-1:

 

Article 1:

Each team, when on defense, may be granted not more than three charged conferences during a seven inning game, without penalty, to permit coaches to their non-playing representatives to confer with a defensive player or players.

 

I read a little further in the NFHS Casebook, page 39, Situation I:

 

"The coach of the defensive team, just after the ball is returned to F1, yells from the dugout: (a) giving instructions to F4 and F6; or (b)  to have F6 and F9 switch positions. RULING: Situations in (a) and (b) do not warrant a charged conference being called."

 

Thus, using this as guidance, I would say no charged conference. But like the other posters stated, I would not let the coach pull this off again during the game.

[Mike Prince]

NFHS Defininition of a conference 2-10-1:

 

A charged conference is a meeting which involves the coach or his non-playing representative and a player or players of the team. 

 

Further rule guidance is given in 3-4-1:

 

Article 1:

Each team, when on defense, may be granted not more than three charged conferences during a seven inning game, without penalty, to permit coaches to their non-playing representatives to confer with a defensive player or players.

 

I read a little further in the NFHS Casebook, page 39, Situation I:

 

"The coach of the defensive team, just after the ball is returned to F1, yells from the dugout: (a) giving instructions to F4 and F6; or (b)  to have F6 and F9 switch positions. RULING: Situations in (a) and (b) do not warrant a charged conference being called."

 

Thus, using this as guidance, I would say no charged conference. But like the other posters stated, I would not let the coach pull this off again during the game.

 

The only wrinkle to the case play above is that the coach called time to issue instructions.  That issue needs to be shut down as mstaylor (and MadMike) said but no charged conference

[mstaylor]

If the coach isn't confident enough in his team to be able to control runners and get signs at the same time, he needs to have verbal signals or give them to just the catcher and let him give the signals. Either way we are not holding the game up. 

[Minnz]

Why give him time?  Just because he asks doesn't mean you have to.  If ball is live and runner takes off then we have a play.  No reason to grant time.  Just like when an infielder wants time after a hit ball or something that has runners on base.  Screw it kid play on and make sure runners aren't moving.

[RichMSN]

Eh, I'm not bothered by this.  If it doesn't happen more than once, I'll probably call time, let him do what he's doing, and move on.

[mstaylor]

Eh, I'm not bothered by this.  If it doesn't happen more than once, I'll probably call time, let him do what he's doing, and move on.

I agree, I would the first time but it is not going to be a habit. I think that is the consensus. . 

[spiritump]

coach calls time + coach talks to team= charged confirence

[RichMSN]

coach calls time + coach talks to team= charged confirence

 

 

I just don't get why anyone in this situation would want to *go there*.  Look, if you want to be "that guy", fine, go ahead, but understand that there's a difference between umpiring by the book and with the book.  If the coach does this more than once, stop granting time.  End of problem.

 

I did threaten a conference this season -- catcher went to chase a foul ball near the dugout and I gave chase.  Coach tells the catcher to go out and tell him, "Blah, blah, blah..." and I told the coach that if he does, I'm charging a conference.  I wasn't charging one for the coach talking to the catcher -- it didn't delay the game -- we were both over there for the foul pop that carried out of play.

[spiritump]

 

coach calls time + coach talks to team= charged confirence

 

 

I just don't get why anyone in this situation would want to *go there*.  Look, if you want to be "that guy", fine, go ahead, but understand that there's a difference between umpiring by the book and with the book.  If the coach does this more than once, stop granting time.  End of problem.

 

I did threaten a conference this season -- catcher went to chase a foul ball near the dugout and I gave chase.  Coach tells the catcher to go out and tell him, "Blah, blah, blah..." and I told the coach that if he does, I'm charging a conference.  I wasn't charging one for the coach talking to the catcher -- it didn't delay the game -- we were both over there for the foul pop that carried out of play.

 

 

 

in this situation what do you tell the other coach when he asks why you did not charge for a conference--you have no rule to back you up ;but the other coach ( the one who did not call time) has a rule that is in the book on his side and you did not enforce---why give a RAT any cheese  that can be used against you  

[RichMSN]

 

 

coach calls time + coach talks to team= charged confirence

 

 

I just don't get why anyone in this situation would want to *go there*.  Look, if you want to be "that guy", fine, go ahead, but understand that there's a difference between umpiring by the book and with the book.  If the coach does this more than once, stop granting time.  End of problem.

 

I did threaten a conference this season -- catcher went to chase a foul ball near the dugout and I gave chase.  Coach tells the catcher to go out and tell him, "Blah, blah, blah..." and I told the coach that if he does, I'm charging a conference.  I wasn't charging one for the coach talking to the catcher -- it didn't delay the game -- we were both over there for the foul pop that carried out of play.

 

 

 

in this situation what do you tell the other coach when he asks why you did not charge for a conference--you have no rule to back you up ;but the other coach ( the one who did not call time) has a rule that is in the book on his side and you did not enforce---why give a RAT any cheese  that can be used against you  

 

 

Why would you go straight to RAT?

 

A coach asks for time, gives a few signals, and I put the ball back in play and a coach is going to ask you to charge a conference?

 

Here's my response:

 

"No."

 

"Play."

[spiritump]

 

 

 

coach calls time + coach talks to team= charged confirence

 

 

I just don't get why anyone in this situation would want to *go there*.  Look, if you want to be "that guy", fine, go ahead, but understand that there's a difference between umpiring by the book and with the book.  If the coach does this more than once, stop granting time.  End of problem.

 

I did threaten a conference this season -- catcher went to chase a foul ball near the dugout and I gave chase.  Coach tells the catcher to go out and tell him, "Blah, blah, blah..." and I told the coach that if he does, I'm charging a conference.  I wasn't charging one for the coach talking to the catcher -- it didn't delay the game -- we were both over there for the foul pop that carried out of play.

 

 

 

in this situation what do you tell the other coach when he asks why you did not charge for a conference--you have no rule to back you up ;but the other coach ( the one who did not call time) has a rule that is in the book on his side and you did not enforce---why give a RAT any cheese  that can be used against you  

 

 

Why would you go straight to RAT?

 

A coach asks for time, gives a few signals, and I put the ball back in play and a coach is going to ask you to charge a conference?

 

Here's my response:

 

"No."

 

"Play."

 

 

RAT is what a coach is called--if you have not found out yet why, give it time you will

 

I have no problem with a coach giving signals to his players --my problem is the fact that he called time,  his team is on the field , his pitcher is on the mound, why does he have to call time.  My problem is that he did call time -time was granted-he spoke to his team--what is the difference between this and calling time to walk out --the coach blew it when he called time.

[mstaylor]

I'm with Rich on this one, no conference but it won't be repeated. Not because it is a conference but because it delays everything. If you charge a conference then everytime a coach yells instructions that would be a conference. 

[spiritump]

I'm with Rich on this one, no conference but it won't be repeated. Not because it is a conference but because it delays everything. If you charge a conference then everytime a coach yells instructions that would be a conference. 

 

 

the fact that the coach is yells instructions is not the point--the coach called time--it is on him that a conference is charged--not every time a coach yells instructions it is a conference--but every time he calls time to yell instruction it is a conference.  Why as a umpire do you want to put yourself in a situation where the other coach can say you bent a rule for a specific team.

[mstaylor]

The first time you assume he wants something, once you know what it is, do not allow it. I just don't see it rising to a conference.

Sent from my C771 using Tapatalk 2

[NCAAump2]

I agree...not a conference.  Same concept, but on the offensive end:  batter in the box, asks for and is granted time, base coach gives him signs...going to charge an offensive conference?  Like Rich said, if you want to grab that end of the stick, be my guest.  But be ready for an argument and an ejection if you charge that coach with a defensive conference,

[blue23ll]

You don't charge a conference, because it's NOT a conference. A coach doesn't CALL time out, he asks for it, we grant it. I would probably do it once, and then if I am asked again I will say, 'just give the signs coach'.

[Minnz]

Or don't grant time.  Nobody says you have to give him time to give signs from the dugout.Just like when a fielder wants time at the end of the play to get the ball back to the pitcher.  I am not giving time for that.  Runners are on base and get the ball back to the pitcher and they will not go anywhere.  Time is a request we choose to grant.  Coach can give signals with the ball being live I say.

[RichMSN]

If the coach says, "Can I have time?" I'm not asking, "What for?"

Maybe the second time I'd not grant it, but I'm pretty sure I would the first time.

Sent via Tapatalk 4

[Forest Ump]

Yea I agree. After the first time,  A simple "Hey Bob, we don't need a time out for you to give signals," should nip this in the bud.