2017 NFHS Baseball Rule Book - ERRORS

[Donny7]

Did you know that after this rule change, two references were overlooked and inadvertently remain in the '2017 NFHS Baseball Rule Book.' The two references that should have been removed are:

 - Page 36, #10 of the After Infraction Table

 - Page 37, 5-1-2f

Both refer to "Delayed-Dead Ball" scenarios. There is NO Delayed-Dead Ball in the newly modified rule. An immediate OUT is called, without deference to any other potential base runners and the ball remains live. 

After confirming this with my states Rules Interpreter, I asked the State Executive Director to please put out a notice. I have seen no published material that communicates to our officials that these major rule discrepancies exist. Applying these rules as written could very well determine the outcome of a contest.    

[gnhbua93]

Calling @lawump

[maven]

I recommend suing NFHS for this gross negligence. This is a crime against humanity, possibly actionable in the International Criminal Court.

[beerguy55]

1 hour ago, Donny7 said:

Applying these rules as written could very well determine the outcome of a contest.    

Isn't that true for all rules?

[Guest Donny7]

These rules NO LONGER apply.

[Donny7]

"It's what you learn after you know it all that counts." Earl Weaver

[Jimurray]

6 hours ago, Donny7 said:

Did you know that after this rule change, two references were overlooked and inadvertently remain in the '2017 NFHS Baseball Rule Book.' The two references that should have been removed are:

 - Page 36, #10 of the After Infraction Table

 - Page 37, 5-1-2f

Both refer to "Delayed-Dead Ball" scenarios. There is NO Delayed-Dead Ball in the newly modified rule. An immediate OUT is called, without deference to any other potential base runners and the ball remains live. 

After confirming this with my states Rules Interpreter, I asked the State Executive Director to please put out a notice. I have seen no published material that communicates to our officials that these major rule discrepancies exist. Applying these rules as written could very well determine the outcome of a contest.    

FED believes that calling attention to their own oversight is not necessary. They addressed the revision in a caseplay and interp. In addition to the rules you posted in conflict with the change in the rule book they also left coach interference in the interference definition, thus runners return TOI. I know of one state that issued a memo to cross out your offending rules. We have a thread that adressed this. I think the rule was addressed in the Texas test but you would not know why your answer was wrong.

[Donny7]

My post was not meant to be critical of anyone or any organization. Jim, you hit the nail on the head, because the Texas test does have a question that directly references this NEW RULE. After many members incorrectly answered, it obviously became a point of discussion and research. When our states rules interpreter confirmed to me, exactly what I stated in the original post, I searched for any information I could find that this information had been disseminated to those of us with 'boots on the ground' whose judgment and integrity is our lifeblood. I apologize, I did not find the caseplay nor interpretation.  

When I found no evidence that a mass communication had been issued, I began looking for the best quality public site for Baseball Officials. My one and only intent was to inform as many High School Umpires as possible, before the season gets in full swing, to beware of these rule book discrepancies.

In researching this site, I thought I had found the right venue to share facts with my brothers that would help them be better informed. Lord knows we get enough criticism already... I didn't expect to get it here.      

[ALStripes17]

My post was not meant to be critical of anyone or any organization. Jim, you hit the nail on the head, because the Texas test does have a question that directly references this NEW RULE. After many members incorrectly answered, it obviously became a point of discussion and research. When our states rules interpreter confirmed to me, exactly what I stated in the original post, I searched for any information I could find that this information had been disseminated to those of us with 'boots on the ground' whose judgment and integrity is our lifeblood. I apologize, I did not find the caseplay nor interpretation.  
When I found no evidence that a mass communication had been issued, I began looking for the best quality public site for Baseball Officials. My one and only intent was to inform as many High School Umpires as possible, before the season gets in full swing, to beware of these rule book discrepancies.
In researching this site, I thought I had found the right venue to share facts with my brothers that would help them be better informed. Lord knows we get enough criticism already... I didn't expect to get it here.      

It's not the information presented. It's how it was presented.


And if the above comments lead you to believe you are being criticized, you are heavily mistaken.

[Aging_Arbiter]

19 hours ago, maven said:

I recommend suing NFHS for this gross negligence. This is a crime against humanity, possibly actionable in the International Criminal Court.

and R3 is on THIRD DAMMIT!!

[lawump]

On 2/27/2017 at 5:59 PM, gnhbua93 said:

Calling @lawump

I'm not the publisher!!! LOL

I will definitely attempt to get this fixed!

[Jimurray]

1 hour ago, lawump said:

I'm not the publisher!!! LOL

I will definitely attempt to get this fixed!

What needs fixing? The book is published. FED dropped the ball but semi-corrected it with a caseplay and interp. Unless you plan to call every states FED umpire association and tell them to make their members aware of the rule change. I don't understand why any state umpire association would not make it clear to their members as to how the rule should be applied. I know of one that made an attempt but missed one point in the rules. Why would Texas Taso have a test question that TF'd umpires and not clarify their understanding of what the FED change was about even though someone in Texas Taso must have known what FED intended and I would think the remaining rule book errors? BTW, the change is appropriate. Now if you have time to spare and have access to those in the know would you mind explaining the NCAA rationale of calling coach assist?

[Donny7]

On ‎2‎/‎28‎/‎2017 at 6:22 AM, ALStripes17 said:

It's not the information presented. It's how it was presented.


And if the above comments lead you to believe you are being criticized, you are heavily mistaken.

I don't know that there is an easy way to attempt to get as many Umpires attention as possible and let them know that some rules are not correct. I guess the short version would have read:

2017 NFHS BASEBALL RULES

Rules that are no longer applicable

• Page 36, # 10 After Infraction Table
• Page 37, 5-1-2f
• All references of Coach Physically Assisting Base Runners defined as Interference.  

 I don't think this would have went over very well. There would have been more questions than answers.

So the original was drafted the way it was for a purpose, 1) To get the attention of as many High School Umpires as possible. 2) In the form of a question. It is "Ask The Umpire" So it begins; Did you know that... What I was hoping to hear is more feedback like what I heard from Jim, that at least ONE (1) State had attempted to inform its members. 3) Communicate what had been done to validate the facts so those reading it would know that I wasn't some wacko spinning out false information. 4) Emphasize that the rule discrepancies were serious and substantial. Not just a typo or two.

The issue was not that some rules were overlooked. Mistakes happen, anyone with half a brain understands that. The issue is that after the mistakes were discovered, there appeared to be little to no effort by the States to communicate that out to the officials.       

 

[ALStripes17]

I don't know that there is an easy way to attempt to get as many Umpires attention as possible and let them know that some rules are not correct. I guess the short version would have read:
2017 NFHS BASEBALL RULES
Rules that are no longer applicable

• Page 36, # 10 After Infraction Table
• Page 37, 5-1-2f
• All references of Coach Physically Assisting Base Runners defined as Interference.  

 I don't think this would have went over very well. There would have been more questions than answers.
So the original was drafted the way it was for a purpose, 1) To get the attention of as many High School Umpires as possible. 2) In the form of a question. It is "Ask The Umpire" So it begins; Did you know that... What I was hoping to hear is more feedback like what I heard from Jim, that at least ONE (1) State had attempted to inform its members. 3) Communicate what had been done to validate the facts so those reading it would know that I wasn't some wacko spinning out false information. 4) Emphasize that the rule discrepancies were serious and substantial. Not just a typo or two.
The issue was not that some rules were overlooked. Mistakes happen, anyone with half a brain understands that. The issue is that after the mistakes were discovered, there appeared to be little to no effort by the States to communicate that out to the officials.       
 

Again, based on perception. Rather than 'HOLY MOTHER DID YOU KNOW WITH CAPS LOCK!?!' which is what garnished the LIGHT sarcasm and level 1 criticisms, I would venture to say something as simple as:


"So I've seen the rule changes/modifications for a coach assisting a runner and have found what seems to be some leftover discrepancies with Table X and dead ball rule 5.1.2(x).


Has anyone heard from their state on these or seen an acknowledgement from the NFHS? Anyone on here able to relay that info to the NFHS so it can be corrected/edited?"


See what I did there? Simple question or concern with a suggested solution. No pitchforks. No OMG CAPS LOCK. And no 'A-ha got em those Commie turds'.


Again, perception. You were offended by how some commented. I gave you an (unwarranted) explanation why. I typically charge for this sort of advice

[lawump]

12 hours ago, Jimurray said:

What needs fixing?

The rulebook needs to be corrected (in the locations pointed out in this thread) where it incorrectly refers to or sets forth the old rule. 

Now in FED, one should just verbally acknowledge the "coach's assistance" ("That's interference! The runner is out!").  And, assuming that the interference/assistance was not the third out, let the rest of the play continue without reference to the interference (other runners can advance/defense can record other outs).  Any statements in the rulebook that do not acknowledge this new FED rule need to be "fixed".

[Donny7]

2 hours ago, ALStripes17 said:

Again, based on perception. Rather than 'HOLY MOTHER DID YOU KNOW WITH CAPS LOCK!?!' which is what garnished the LIGHT sarcasm and level 1 criticisms, I would venture to say something as simple as:


"So I've seen the rule changes/modifications for a coach assisting a runner and have found what seems to be some leftover discrepancies with Table X and dead ball rule 5.1.2(x).


Has anyone heard from their state on these or seen an acknowledgement from the NFHS? Anyone on here able to relay that info to the NFHS so it can be corrected/edited?"


See what I did there? Simple question or concern with a suggested solution. No pitchforks. No OMG CAPS LOCK. And no 'A-ha got em those Commie turds'.


Again, perception. You were offended by how some commented. I gave you an (unwarranted) explanation why. I typically charge for this sort of advice

You've got a vivid imagination son. I didn't post this information on here for an English, grammar or people skills lesson. Or to have the content and tone critiqued. I don't use this Forum for the purpose of being the self appointed critic or for entertainment. I posted it to help other umpires.

2017 NFHS BASEBALL RULES

Rules that are no longer applicable

• Page 36, # 10 After Infraction Table
• Page 37, 5-1-2f
• All references of Coach Physically Assisting Base Runners defined as Interference.

Now I am going to stop wasting my time responding to inconsequential, minor, trivial matters and go do something really important, like pick up my two precious granddaughters ages 5 and 7 and go play.

 

 

 

[ALStripes17]

You've got a vivid imagination son. I didn't post this information on here for an English, grammar or people skills lesson. Or to have the content and tone critiqued. I don't use this Forum for the purpose of being the self appointed critic or for entertainment. I posted it to help other umpires.
2017 NFHS BASEBALL RULES
Rules that are no longer applicable

• Page 36, # 10 After Infraction Table
• Page 37, 5-1-2f
• All references of Coach Physically Assisting Base Runners defined as Interference.

Now I am going to stop wasting my time responding to inconsequential, minor, trivial matters and go do something really important, like pick up my two precious granddaughters ages 5 and 7 and go play.
 

 

 

You present problems, I find solutions.


Enjoy granddaughter time!

[Donny7]

On ‎3‎/‎1‎/‎2017 at 0:10 PM, ALStripes17 said:

You present problems, I find solutions.


Enjoy granddaughter time!

To ALStripes17... I found the Problem and the Solution. Please see #3 below. Hope every State does this.

THE FOLLOWING BULLETIN WAS EMAILED TO ALL TEXAS MEMBERS TODAY - March 10, 2017

From: Texas State Baseball Rules Interpreter

To: TASO Baseball Umpire Membership

Subject: Baseball Weekly Bulletin 17-1

 

The 2017 high school Baseball season is upon us. I hope that for every one of you, it will be the season you each hope it to be. Your hard work and diligent efforts over the last few months is most appreciated as you prepared for the games to begin. We have some of the best baseball played in the nation and I am glad we have the officiating to match.

We started the first two weeks of the season rather quietly with little for me to pass on, but this last week did provide some material. Please remember to provide me with any issues, situations, concerns, etc. you may have. It is most helpful.
 

Well, let’s start with bats; it has been some time since we needed to do that.

1)    Easton Lock n Load. We reported to many of you back in January that the Easton Lock n Load bat, while not legal for NCAA play, was allowed for high school games. The concern was that the NCAA was not going to allow the BBCOR logo to be on the bat. So we told everyone in January, that the bat was legal for high school play despite not having a BBCOR logo on the bat. Now, after some deliberation, the NCAA has allowed, despite the bat still not legal for their games, the BBCOR logo to be placed on the barrel of the Lock n Load bat. I am not sure how many bats without the logo have been sold, but the bottom line now is with or without the BBCOR logo, the EASTON Lock n Load bat is approved for high school play.

2)    Illegal bat reporting. Some concern has arisen that the incident rate for BBCOR bats being altered (rolled or shaved) is higher than previously thought. To begin to understand the true extent of this possibility, all baseball umpires in Texas are being asked to do the following upon discovery of an illegal bat: a) continue to enforce the applicable rules, rule 7-4-1a for the batter and 4-3-3b penalty for a coach, and b) complete the UIL incident report that can be found on the TASO website. This data collection will provide the ability to better determine illegal bat use.

3)    2017 Rule Change 3-2-2 and 8-4-2s. As you will remember, these rules were changed and added to show that if a coach physically assists a baserunner, it is no longer interference or a delayed dead ball. We simply have an out at the time of the infraction and play continues. Unfortunately, rule 5-1-2f and the Dead Ball Table item 10 on “After Infraction, Ball Not Dead Until Umpire Calls Time” were not deleted. Please line through those rule portions as they are no longer applicable. We will correct this omission in the next rulebook.

4)    Third to first pick-off move. As a reminder, in high school rules, the third to first pick-off move, when done in compliance with the rule, is still a legal move. We have had 3 reported balks with the only reason being is it was a third to first move.

5)    Play Cards. As with last year, the use of play cards on players is legal provided they are worn on the players arm. Wearing of the play card on the belt is not legal.  

6)    Protection of Players in an unprotected area. Rule 3-3-4 mandates that whenever players are warming up in an unprotected area within the confines of the field, another team member must be positioned between them and the batter to protect them from a batted or thrown ball. This player is required to have a glove, but it is not mandatory for him to wear a helmet. We have had two incidents in the last two weeks where one coach was restricted to the bench for not having this player wear a helmet and another where the team, having limited helmets, could not have a player on-deck warming up because the umpire required the player protecting the catcher and pitcher to wear a helmet.