Jump to content
  • 0

NFHS Abandonment Rule


Guest HS Official

Question

Guest HS Official

NFHS FED (High School) 8-4-1-i
Runner abandons effort to advance when he enters the dugout, or (with two outs) before all fielders leave the diamond.

Is it the majority opinion of high school officials that this rule should be modified more like OBR's, "leaving the dirt circle" instead of having to wait until he enters the dugout? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Answers 34
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Top Posters For This Question

Popular Posts

Maybe, but: You can't get the answer to that in a forum like this, with only a small, not necessarily representative sample Nobody here has survey data that would generate an actual answe

You can "not like" the rules and still work the games under those rules.  You can work to get the rule changed, if you want.   I don't like the "immediate dead ball on a balk" rule -- it did

I would up vote all these responses. But then it would remove the post from the "still need a best answer" part of this sub forum. 

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Maybe, but:

  1. You can't get the answer to that in a forum like this, with only a small, not necessarily representative sample
  2. Nobody here has survey data that would generate an actual answer
  3. Your question will prompt the FED trolls to pop their heads out of their caves to whinge about FED's baseball for teens having different rules from OBR's baseball for professional adult athletes.
  4. Having an affirmative answer won't change anything for anyone.

Perhaps there's a different question about rules or interpretations we might help you answer?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
17 hours ago, Guest HS Official said:

NFHS FED (High School) 8-4-1-i
Runner abandons effort to advance when he enters the dugout, or (with two outs) before all fielders leave the diamond.

Is it the majority opinion of high school officials that this rule should be modified more like OBR's, "leaving the dirt circle" instead of having to wait until he enters the dugout? 

There is an easy fix. If you don't like FED rules don't work FED games. See how easy that was ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
9 minutes ago, UMP45 said:

There is an easy fix. If you don't like FED rules don't work FED games. See how easy that was ?

You can "not like" the rules and still work the games under those rules.  You can work to get the rule changed, if you want.

 

I don't like the "immediate dead ball on a balk" rule -- it didn't stop me from working FED games.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
On 2/5/2021 at 10:02 PM, Guest HS Official said:

Is it the majority opinion of high school officials that this rule should be modified more like OBR's, "leaving the dirt circle" instead of having to wait until he enters the dugout?

We need to strongly consider two factors: 

  1. There is a wide and wild variety of ball field layouts that may or may not possess all the boundaries a rule like this invokes. It is impossible to expect and impose that every institution using NFHS Rules create and maintain ball fields and these sorts of features simply for a Rule’s vernacular. Fed-sanctioned games have been played on fields with skinned (all dirt, no grass) infields; they’ve been played without a distinguishable mound; they’ve been played with backstops so close that the PU can take one step back and lean against the chain link fencing. 
  2. High-School baseball is about just what its name evokes – school. Education. Learning. There is far more involvement of active coaching here than at any other official level of baseball (save, perhaps, Little League’s modified-for-their-purposes version of OBR), and much more responsibility falls on the coach, and the coach-athlete relationship, than any other level. As such, why shouldn’t a coach be allowed to visibly (gesturing, etc.) or audibly (shouting, yelling, etc.) guide or remind his player to do something? And, why should there be any physically or temporally ambiguous limit on that coaching? 

NFHS Rules are worded, famously (and infamously, equal), to accommodate the least common denominator for the purposes of play, and this includes umpiring / officiating. Even in the OBR Rule you’re invoking, Rule 5.05(a)(2), there is provision for umpire judgement, observing a batter who lingers (temporal) or who behaves in a manner, or concedes, regardless of the actual boundary of the dirt circle being there or his crossing it (physical), may be (not shall be) called Out. 
Regarding the rule, too, there is a concession that, even at the Major League level, not all home plate dirt circles are uniform. It then falls to, again, umpire judgement; and, we’ve already pointed out the NFHS’ perspective on umpire judgement. 

“Enter dugout” is a far better defined boundary than an ambiguous dirt circle and an umpire’s judgement... which may or may not be present. 

Either. Both. 

I think, if polled, the majority of NFHS umpires would want the Balk Rule modified to OBR-style much more than this rule. Second to this would be the Fake/Feint to 3B rule. Probably trailing that, if you’re truly polling, is the recent “NOCSAE”-standardized baseball rule(s), if only because it makes the umpire the villain if enforced to the “letter of the law”. 

Leaving a/the dirt circle? That may or may not be there? Waaaaay down on the list. 

Certainly, on this umpire’s list of rules-to-be-changed, it’s after the “PU is god” rule and the “umpire shirt shall be navy” rule. 

... on second thought, that “shall be navy” rule’s gotta go. Now. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Apparently, when a batter-runner is considered to have abandoned his right to run after an uncaught strike three had not been much of an issue in the majors until 1976 when they first discussed it in the rule book. At first it was just a Note/Comment for OBR rule 6.09(b). It was moved to the rule book proper as a subparagraph to 6.09(b) in 1978. The current rule declaring a batter-runner out when he leaves the dirt circle is now designated 5.05(a)(2) and has only been in the book since 2006.

5.05 When the Batter Becomes a Runner

(a) The batter becomes a runner when:

(2) The third strike called by the umpire is not caught, providing (1) first base is unoccupied, or (2) first base is occupied with two out;

Rule 5.05(a)(2) Comment: A batter who does not realize his situation on a third strike not caught, and who is not in the process of running to first base, shall be declared out once he leaves the dirt circle surrounding home plate.

As near as I can tell, the FED didn’t add their rule until circa 1990 and it was basically the same as the OBR until 2006.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest Guest HS Official
12 hours ago, MadMax said:

We need to strongly consider two factors: 

  1. There is a wide and wild variety of ball field layouts that may or may not possess all the boundaries a rule like this invokes. It is impossible to expect and impose that every institution using NFHS Rules create and maintain ball fields and these sorts of features simply for a Rule’s vernacular. Fed-sanctioned games have been played on fields with skinned (all dirt, no grass) infields; they’ve been played without a distinguishable mound; they’ve been played with backstops so close that the PU can take one step back and lean against the chain link fencing. 
  2. High-School baseball is about just what its name evokes – school. Education. Learning. There is far more involvement of active coaching here than at any other official level of baseball (save, perhaps, Little League’s modified-for-their-purposes version of OBR), and much more responsibility falls on the coach, and the coach-athlete relationship, than any other level. As such, why shouldn’t a coach be allowed to visibly (gesturing, etc.) or audibly (shouting, yelling, etc.) guide or remind his player to do something? And, why should there be any physically or temporally ambiguous limit on that coaching? 

NFHS Rules are worded, famously (and infamously, equal), to accommodate the least common denominator for the purposes of play, and this includes umpiring / officiating. Even in the OBR Rule you’re invoking, Rule 5.05(a)(2), there is provision for umpire judgement, observing a batter who lingers (temporal) or who behaves in a manner, or concedes, regardless of the actual boundary of the dirt circle being there or his crossing it (physical), may be (not shall be) called Out. 
Regarding the rule, too, there is a concession that, even at the Major League level, not all home plate dirt circles are uniform. It then falls to, again, umpire judgement; and, we’ve already pointed out the NFHS’ perspective on umpire judgement. 

“Enter dugout” is a far better defined boundary than an ambiguous dirt circle and an umpire’s judgement... which may or may not be present. 

Either. Both. 

I think, if polled, the majority of NFHS umpires would want the Balk Rule modified to OBR-style much more than this rule. Second to this would be the Fake/Feint to 3B rule. Probably trailing that, if you’re truly polling, is the recent “NOCSAE”-standardized baseball rule(s), if only because it makes the umpire the villain if enforced to the “letter of the law”. 

Leaving a/the dirt circle? That may or may not be there? Waaaaay down on the list. 

Certainly, on this umpire’s list of rules-to-be-changed, it’s after the “PU is god” rule and the “umpire shirt shall be navy” rule. 

... on second thought, that “shall be navy” rule’s gotta go. Now. 

 

I'm realtivly sure the other rules you commented on are higher on the "Modify the Fed Rule List" but I was curious about abandonment. I think Maven's opinion is an honest and accurate assesment. 

I guess... in the interest of fair play, it would be advantagous to be in the first base dugout. (Thats not ambiguous, just not an equal playing field.) The coach in the third base dugout may not want to educate or coach as loud as his opponent. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
2 hours ago, Guest Guest HS Official said:

I'm realtivly sure the other rules you commented on are higher on the "Modify the Fed Rule List" but I was curious about abandonment. I think Maven's opinion is an honest and accurate assesment. 

I guess... in the interest of fair play, it would be advantagous to be in the first base dugout. (Thats not ambiguous, just not an equal playing field.) The coach in the third base dugout may not want to educate or coach as loud as his opponent. 

I guess there would be one of the reasons to pick the 1b dugout as your main dugout for home games.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
On 2/5/2021 at 10:02 PM, Guest HS Official said:

NFHS FED (High School) 8-4-1-i
Runner abandons effort to advance when he enters the dugout, or (with two outs) before all fielders leave the diamond.

Is it the majority opinion of high school officials that this rule should be modified more like OBR's, "leaving the dirt circle" instead of having to wait until he enters the dugout? 

You're assuming that every FED game at every facility actually has a discernible dirt circle around the plate.  If you believe that you have a very narrow frame of reference.

The dugout at least provides something that's more easily identifiable...even it's it's just a bench, or an area where the team stands together, at the least the player needs to leave the field of play to get there.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
19 hours ago, Senor Azul said:

Apparently, when a batter-runner is considered to have abandoned his right to run after an uncaught strike three had not been much of an issue in the majors until 1976 when they first discussed it in the rule book. At first it was just a Note/Comment for OBR rule 6.09(b). It was moved to the rule book proper as a subparagraph to 6.09(b) in 1978. The current rule declaring a batter-runner out when he leaves the dirt circle is now designated 5.05(a)(2) and has only been in the book since 2006.

5.05 When the Batter Becomes a Runner

(a) The batter becomes a runner when:

(2) The third strike called by the umpire is not caught, providing (1) first base is unoccupied, or (2) first base is occupied with two out;

Rule 5.05(a)(2) Comment: A batter who does not realize his situation on a third strike not caught, and who is not in the process of running to first base, shall be declared out once he leaves the dirt circle surrounding home plate.

As near as I can tell, the FED didn’t add their rule until circa 1990 and it was basically the same as the OBR until 2006.

I believe the reason for the OBR change was pace of play. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Mr. Jimurray, you may be right about the reason for the rule change but I don’t think so. Here’s why. The 2006 OBR rule book lists more than 20 changes for the 2006 season. One of those changes reads—

Added experimental pace-of-game rule for National Association play (Rule 6.02(d)).

Of the 20+ new rules listed that is the only one that says anything about the pace of play. Rule 6.02(d) was added to the Official Baseball Rules. This experimental rule was in effect for all National Association leagues in 2005. There were no changes in any aspect or wording of the experimental rule from 2005. (The rule, although in effect in 2005 for all National Association leagues, did not appear in print in the 2005 book.) Here’s how the change for rule 6.09(b) is listed—

Amended rules on batter-runner after third strike not caught (Rules 6.09(b) and 7.08(a)).

Two rules were involved in the change to clarify abandonment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
6 hours ago, Senor Azul said:

Mr. Jimurray, you may be right about the reason for the rule change but I don’t think so. Here’s why. The 2006 OBR rule book lists more than 20 changes for the 2006 season. One of those changes reads—

Added experimental pace-of-game rule for National Association play (Rule 6.02(d)).

Of the 20+ new rules listed that is the only one that says anything about the pace of play. Rule 6.02(d) was added to the Official Baseball Rules. This experimental rule was in effect for all National Association leagues in 2005. There were no changes in any aspect or wording of the experimental rule from 2005. (The rule, although in effect in 2005 for all National Association leagues, did not appear in print in the 2005 book.) Here’s how the change for rule 6.09(b) is listed—

Amended rules on batter-runner after third strike not caught (Rules 6.09(b) and 7.08(a)).

Two rules were involved in the change to clarify abandonment.

I don't remember where I read or heard the reason for the change but it is reinforced by the PBUC "lingers" interp.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest HS Official
9 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

You're assuming that every FED game at every facility actually has a discernible dirt circle around the plate.  If you believe that you have a very narrow frame of reference.

The dugout at least provides something that's more easily identifiable...even it's it's just a bench, or an area where the team stands together, at the least the player needs to leave the field of play to get there.

 If we are not on a turf field, All of us, often have to make a judgment on where the batters box 'used to be'. Judging  the circumference of the dirt circle would be a cake walk in comparison. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Well, it just so happens I have the 2014 PBUC—which I believe is the last edition under that name. The next year it became the Minor League Baseball Umpire Manual. And you are partially right.

The 2014 PBUC (section 6.15, p. 64) does refer to an interpretation about a batter-runner who lingers at the plate after an uncaught third strike. By the way, that section is titled ABANDONING BASE PATHS. Here is what it says about the batter-runner who lingers—

“Under the Casebook Comment to Official Baseball Rule 6.09(b), a batter who strikes out on third strike not caught is treated differently than the above two plays relating to abandoning the base paths…

“The above ruling shall also apply to a batter who strikes out on a third strike not caught and who makes no effort to advance to first base within, in the umpire’s judgment, a reasonable amount of time. For example, a batter who ‘lingers’ at home plate, removing his shin guard, and then takes off for first base shall also be declared out.”

That’s it! I don’t see how that supports (or re-inforces) your belief for the purpose of the rule change. In addition, the same text (nearly identical) appears in the 2018 MiLBUM with absolutely no mention of any pace-of-play issues anywhere in its section titled Abandoning Base Paths After Third Strike Not Caught. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest HS Official
21 hours ago, BT_Blue said:

I guess there would be one of the reasons to pick the 1b dugout as your main dugout for home games.

Maybe we're on to something. What if there was an NFHS test question that read: 

What NFHS rule provides a distinct advantage to the team in the 1B Dugout? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest HS Official
On 2/6/2021 at 4:21 PM, UMP45 said:

There is an easy fix. If you don't like FED rules don't work FED games. See how easy that was ?

What NFHS rule affords a significant advantage to the team in 1B dugout?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
45 minutes ago, Senor Azul said:

Well, it just so happens I have the 2014 PBUC—which I believe is the last edition under that name. The next year it became the Minor League Baseball Umpire Manual. And you are partially right.

The 2014 PBUC (section 6.15, p. 64) does refer to an interpretation about a batter-runner who lingers at the plate after an uncaught third strike. By the way, that section is titled ABANDONING BASE PATHS. Here is what it says about the batter-runner who lingers—

“Under the Casebook Comment to Official Baseball Rule 6.09(b), a batter who strikes out on third strike not caught is treated differently than the above two plays relating to abandoning the base paths…

“The above ruling shall also apply to a batter who strikes out on a third strike not caught and who makes no effort to advance to first base within, in the umpire’s judgment, a reasonable amount of time. For example, a batter who ‘lingers’ at home plate, removing his shin guard, and then takes off for first base shall also be declared out.”

That’s it! I don’t see how that supports (or re-inforces) your belief for the purpose of the rule change. In addition, the same text (nearly identical) appears in the 2018 MiLBUM with absolutely no mention of any pace-of-play issues anywhere in its section titled Abandoning Base Paths After Third Strike Not Caught. 

You don’t infer that they don’t want to wait on a lingering batter and call him out before he leaves the circle as a pace of play issue? Why would they tell us to call him out otherwise. He hasn’t left the circle as per the rule. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
On 2/6/2021 at 4:21 PM, UMP45 said:

There is an easy fix. If you don't like FED rules don't work FED games. See how easy that was ?

Bashing - Judgmental comments with no constructive or educational value.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
On 2/13/2021 at 4:05 AM, Donny7 said:

Bashing - Judgmental comments with no constructive or educational value.

Bashing???   I call it a simple resolution to the aforementioned concern.  If you have "issues" with the rule set (be it not understanding, remembering, or applying correctly) don't work the games with that rule set.  Thereby relieving you of that stressor.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
On 2/15/2021 at 9:10 AM, Aging_Arbiter said:

Bashing???   I call it a simple resolution to the aforementioned concern.  If you have "issues" with the rule set (be it not understanding, remembering, or applying correctly) don't work the games with that rule set.  Thereby relieving you of that stressor.

 

Not sure what your organization bylaws may or may not require you to do, but here is an excerpt from mine.

e. Conducting studies and analysis of baseball rules to identify sources of umpiring problems and seek solutions in cooperation with appropriate rule-making bodies.

NOTE: My bylaws failed to mention... If you dont like it, quit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
13 hours ago, Donny7 said:

Not sure what your organization bylaws may or may not require you to do, but here is an excerpt from mine.

e. Conducting studies and analysis of baseball rules to identify sources of umpiring problems and seek solutions in cooperation with appropriate rule-making bodies.

NOTE: My bylaws failed to mention... If you dont like it, quit.

In this context, you are required to conduct studies and analysis of baseball rules. :HS How many studies have you conducted?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
7 hours ago, LMSANS said:

In this context, you are required to conduct studies and analysis of baseball rules. :HS How many studies have you conducted?

  • 2020 - ZERO 
  • 2019 - ONE 
  • 2018 - TWO, in conjunction with 3 other state organizations

I hope this one bylaw excerpt doesn't have the appearance of being negative, because its not. No set of rules or standards are perfect. This specific one is in the interest of, continuous improvement, not to criticize anyone. I shudder to think what baseball rules we would be playing by today if it hadnt been for forward thinking people with open minds.  

Please read the entire bylaws 'PURPOSE' section pasted below. I hope it will provide you with a better understanding.   

ARTICLE II- PURPOSE

The purpose of the Association shall be to foster and promote national and international amateur sports in the game of baseball by:

a. Advancing the ideals of good sportsmanship and fair play through qualified officiating in baseball, and respect for the authority of baseball umpires at all levels of competition.

b. Providing educational programs to advance the skills of baseball umpires at all levels of competition.

c. Conducting public information programs that will encourage appreciation for the skill and competence of baseball umpires.

d. Placing special emphasis on developing concepts of good sportsmanship among the youth of the nation, both as competitors and spectators.

e. Conducting studies and analysis of baseball rules to identify sources of umpiring problems and seek solutions in cooperation with appropriate rule-making bodies.

f. Developing and maintaining a membership consisting of experience and capable baseball umpires whose integrity is above reproach and who are actively engaged each year in umpiring games.

g. Fostering a high standard of ethics encouraging fair play, sportsmanship, closer cooperation and better understanding among umpires, athletic representatives, coaches, players, and athletic directors.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
8 hours ago, Donny7 said:
  • 2020 - ZERO 
  • 2019 - ONE 
  • 2018 - TWO, in conjunction with 3 other state organizations

I hope this one bylaw excerpt doesn't have the appearance of being negative, because its not. No set of rules or standards are perfect. This specific one is in the interest of, continuous improvement, not to criticize anyone. I shudder to think what baseball rules we would be playing by today if it hadnt been for forward thinking people with open minds.  

Please read the entire bylaws 'PURPOSE' section pasted below. I hope it will provide you with a better understanding.   

ARTICLE II- PURPOSE

The purpose of the Association shall be to foster and promote national and international amateur sports in the game of baseball by:

a. Advancing the ideals of good sportsmanship and fair play through qualified officiating in baseball, and respect for the authority of baseball umpires at all levels of competition.

b. Providing educational programs to advance the skills of baseball umpires at all levels of competition.

c. Conducting public information programs that will encourage appreciation for the skill and competence of baseball umpires.

d. Placing special emphasis on developing concepts of good sportsmanship among the youth of the nation, both as competitors and spectators.

e. Conducting studies and analysis of baseball rules to identify sources of umpiring problems and seek solutions in cooperation with appropriate rule-making bodies.

f. Developing and maintaining a membership consisting of experience and capable baseball umpires whose integrity is above reproach and who are actively engaged each year in umpiring games.

g. Fostering a high standard of ethics encouraging fair play, sportsmanship, closer cooperation and better understanding among umpires, athletic representatives, coaches, players, and athletic directors.

The purpose of the association....Doesn't require you to do anything. This statement doesn't even require the association to do anything. It suggests ways that amateur sports can be promoted by the association.

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...