Jump to content
  • 0
Guest Coach

umpire discretion ? : replacement runner

Question

Guest Coach

First, I was just a spectator to the below and had no horse in this race.

A particular weak player is known to avoid pressure as much as he can.   Too nervous and insecure, even for a 10 year old,. He's also very overweight and very slow (relevance below).  He would rather not play the field any more than the minimum, exaggerates injury, etc...anything to get taken out the game when the game is on the line.   Other teams have insisted that he plays the minimum, can't skip at-bat without recording an out.  Can't handle stress well.

Recreation league championship game....home team batting in the bottom of the 6th, last licks (unless extra innings). One out and no one on.  Earlier in the game the kid wanted to skip his turn in the batting order but his coach made him hit rather than take the auto out..  In This 6th inning at bat the kid was skimmed in upper back with a lobbed pitch and reacts as he was hit hard, crying etc.   Asked if he was OK, he said no. He insisted on coming out of the game.   Fast replacement runner then steals 2nd, 3rd and scores on a fielder's choice to tie the game forcing extra innings.

It wasn't a ruse by the home team manager to replace the slow kid on first base, but the kid wanted off the field.  I seemed unreasonable for such a wimpy glancing pitch to cause a kid to take himself out of the game only due to the pressure of being on base and not pain.   Does an umpire have any common sense fairness authority to not let a kid come out of a game for a faster player ?

I figure the answer is No, but it was clear the kid just didn't want to play with the game on the line....and it cost the other team the game.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
11 minutes ago, Guest Coach said:

1) Does an umpire have any common sense fairness authority to not let a kid come out of a game for a faster player ?

2) and it cost the other team the game.

 

 

1) No

2) No it didn't

 

Some leagues have an "opposing team chooses the replacement player" when similar actions occur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Ummm....why?

What if the kid just decided to leave?   You or the coach going to actually physically prevent him from leaving the ball field?   That might be called "false imprisonment".

20 minutes ago, Guest Coach said:

I figure the answer is No, but it was clear the kid just didn't want to play with the game on the line....and it cost the other team the game.

No...the other team's inability to get the runner out, prevent the runner from scoring, and/or score more runs than their opponent in extra innings cost them the game.

 

The bigger problem is why are people forcing this kid to play?   The key words are "play" and "game".

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
23 minutes ago, noumpere said:

1) No

2) No it didn't

 

Some leagues have an "opposing team chooses the replacement player" when similar actions occur.

Only if there are no eligible subs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
15 minutes ago, Rich Ives said:

Only if there are no eligible subs.

Of course -- and I'm assuming that's the case here since "minimum play" was mentioned, and the game was in the bottom of the last -- it's likely that all subs were used.  And, if there was an eligible sub, then this wouldn't even be an issue.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Some leagues use the "last out" as the deciding factor. Whomever on the team made the last out is the replacement runner. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
8 hours ago, noumpere said:

Of course -- and I'm assuming that's the case here since "minimum play" was mentioned, and the game was in the bottom of the last -- it's likely that all subs were used.  And, if there was an eligible sub, then this wouldn't even be an issue.

Easy - If weak player was the sub for better player then better player can re-enter for weak player.

The issue here seemed to be a "not fair" cry from the defense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

We had a JBO (middle school) game tonight. At the plate meeting, opposing coach announces one of their players is recovering from a ruptured spleen and can only bat and run to first due to a fear of blunt force trauma. Plate umpire talks to father and is told they have a doctor's note, not with them, to verify. He allows player to play. My manager agrees and the game goes on and that isn't a problem except that he's their clean up hitter and he can kill the ball. We still managed to win. But it's bugging me that the umpire, and the kid's father, would have allowed this kid to play. Am I being overly cautious? There's no way in hell I'm letting this kid play. Anyone else not have a problem with this? There is a mandatory play rule, but there's no penalty. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest Coach

was a Rec game....everyone in the batting order and kids play minimum 4 in the field.   No "substitutions" in the usual sense.  Why does the kid play ?  Enjoys being on a team, friends, the snack bar after the game, etc.   Probably not uncommon in that way.   But often doesn't like actually playing and in this case could not have experienced real pain and begged off, allowing a much faster player to steal 2 bases on the next two pitches.     

 

Re: the injured middle school player.  To me that 1) family's priorities are screwed up and 2) he should not have been allowed to re-enter the game several times to hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
9 hours ago, Mister B said:

We had a JBO (middle school) game tonight. At the plate meeting, opposing coach announces one of their players is recovering from a ruptured spleen and can only bat and run to first due to a fear of blunt force trauma. Plate umpire talks to father and is told they have a doctor's note, not with them, to verify. He allows player to play. My manager agrees and the game goes on and that isn't a problem except that he's their clean up hitter and he can kill the ball. We still managed to win. But it's bugging me that the umpire, and the kid's father, would have allowed this kid to play. Am I being overly cautious? There's no way in hell I'm letting this kid play. Anyone else not have a problem with this? There is a mandatory play rule, but there's no penalty. 

You should have asked to see the note.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
9 hours ago, Mister B said:

We had a JBO (middle school) game tonight. At the plate meeting, opposing coach announces one of their players is recovering from a ruptured spleen and can only bat and run to first due to a fear of blunt force trauma. Plate umpire talks to father and is told they have a doctor's note, not with them, to verify. He allows player to play. My manager agrees and the game goes on and that isn't a problem except that he's their clean up hitter and he can kill the ball. We still managed to win. But it's bugging me that the umpire, and the kid's father, would have allowed this kid to play. Am I being overly cautious? There's no way in hell I'm letting this kid play. Anyone else not have a problem with this? There is a mandatory play rule, but there's no penalty. 

Well, you're most likely event of blunt force trauma occurs when you're at the plate.

The doctor is clueless and the parents have their priorities F*#Ked up.

Without a note, this coach isn't playing this kid.   Even with a note, this coach is probably not playing this kid.   Parents can complain to the league all they want...or they can take the equipment and lineup cards and run the team.

I don't know what power/responsibility an umpire has here - especially if the parents and doctor are consenting.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

In Little League the player must have a medical release for "full participation" otherwise he/she can't play.

No way a kid is just batting and running to first.  If he plays he must meet MPR which includes playing defense.

I agree with the others, the manager and parents have their priorities messed up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
2 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

Without a note, this coach isn't playing this kid.   Even with a note, this coach is probably not playing this kid.   Parents can complain to the league all they want...or they can take the equipment and lineup cards and run the team.

I don't know what power/responsibility an umpire has here - especially if the parents and doctor are consenting.   

It is maligned as a crutch for umpires, but I'm thinking 9.01c comes in here, or if it's renumbered, whatever it is.  No note physically present, as in the OP, means I wouldn't even need to explicitly invoke it.  If the note appeared?  Tough.  I'm not letting a clearly convalescing player part-time it, when there's still a risk.

(My own "[real-name] 3:16" says "Don't get sued because other people are damn fools!"  So there's that, too.  And I'm sure there are some eye-rolls out there, over mentioning being sued.  But we've all heard actual stories of people/groups being sued for one thing or another, and those person-injury lawyers I see on "tha tee-vee" probably paid for those ads with someone else's cash, so there you go.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
5 hours ago, Guest Coach said:

was a Rec game....everyone in the batting order and kids play minimum 4 in the field.   No "substitutions" in the usual sense. 

That's exactly the kind of league that needs a local rule on what happens if someone can't play -- who becomes the sub on offense (it probably doesn't matter as much on defense) (last out; last batter not on base; offense chooses; defense chooses), and whether that player can return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
14 hours ago, Guest Coach said:

was a Rec game....everyone in the batting order and kids play minimum 4 in the field.   No "substitutions" in the usual sense.  Why does the kid play ?  Enjoys being on a team, friends, the snack bar after the game, etc.   Probably not uncommon in that way.   But often doesn't like actually playing and in this case could not have experienced real pain and begged off, allowing a much faster player to steal 2 bases on the next two pitches.     

 

Re: the injured middle school player.  To me that 1) family's priorities are screwed up and 2) he should not have been allowed to re-enter the game several times to hit.

 

Not to discourage somebody from playing baseball ... but sounds like the kid should be on the track team instead.  I honestly believe that is why track has gotten so popular in this area: kids can go hang out with their friends all day, be a part of they team, and only have to actually compete for a few minutes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...