Jump to content
  • 0

Long beard hbp


ousafe

Question

Last night, rec league, we had a player with a long, zz-top style beard. At least 18" long.  My partner (bored with a smooth game) asked - what if the tail of his beard gets hit by a pitch?

I have a hbp, and "stay here" only if he leans in.

Thoughts or rulings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 0
25 minutes ago, ousafe said:

Last night, rec league, we had a player with a long, zz-top style beard. At least 18" long.  My partner (bored with a smooth game) asked - what if the tail of his beard gets hit by a pitch?

I have a hbp, and "stay here" only if he leans in.

Thoughts or rulings?

In the zone, DBS. If not, he gets 1st. IMO.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Interesting question…I’ve got a HBP as there is nothing in rules prohibiting facial hair, and it certainly is not detached or improperly worn equipment (like an untucked shirt for example)

As other said, if it’s dangling in strike zone, it’s a strike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

I would agree that the definition of the term person is indeed relevant here. But I would also say that it is incomplete here. I think you also need to add the definition of touch--

2021 OBR Definitions

TOUCH. To touch a player or umpire is to touch any part of his body, or any uniform or equipment worn by him (but not any jewelry (e.g., necklaces, bracelets, etc.) worn by a player).

(Touch) Comment: Equipment shall be considered worn by a player or umpire if it is in contact with its intended place on his person.

Upon first glance your question would seem to be a bit facetious but it does have some serious ramifications when it comes to such things as dangling laces and jewelry. For example, the 2021 MiLBUM tells us…

Hanging laces attached to a defensive player’s glove shall count when determining whether or not a ball was touched over fair territory and whether or not a catcher interfered with a batter’s attempt to strike at a pitched ball. As stated in the definition of a Tag, contact with hanging laces alone does not constitute a tag.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 hour ago, flyingron said:

Of course, you need to be consistent.   If beard counts for HBP, we should be able to put the tag on the beard and the other rules for balls touching runners/fielders applied.

Wha...oh, baseballs.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

When it gets colder and the kids wear hoodies I tell the coaches if it hits a hoodie while they are at bat its part of the uni.

 

But same goes if they tag a player on the hood its a tag

 

How do the ladies play long pony tails and such in softball?  If it hits that hair while at bat I assume they award 1b correct?

 

if so why any different for a mans beard unless its in the zone.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
15 hours ago, SeeingEyeDog said:

Me: Time! [motions to 1B with left hand]

Also me (sotto voce): ...and ahhh...let's step closer to the razor next time, how 'bout?

~Dawg

ZZ Top turned down a very lucrative offer from a razor company to shave their beards.

Do you  mutter "eat less" to a batter that gets hit on an oversize gut?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 hour ago, Rich Ives said:

ZZ Top turned down a very lucrative offer from a razor company to shave their beards.

Do you  mutter "eat less" to a batter that gets hit on an oversize gut?

No, but when a batter complained that I called a strike on a pitch that almost hit him in the dick, I informed him that, no, it didn't, because he was six inches away from the plate.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Your question, Mr. ousafe, reminds me of a very famous barnstorming team called the House of David. They took on all comers from the Majors and Minors, the Negro Leagues, and any local semi-pro teams. What made them distinctive was that every member of the team had long-flowing hair and beards of Biblical proportions. They came from a place in Michigan called Benton Harbor and played from about 1915 till about 1955. I couldn’t find any anecdotes about their tonsorial splendor causing any problems with the rules though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
On 8/6/2021 at 10:08 AM, ArchAngel72 said:

When it gets colder and the kids wear hoodies I tell the coaches if it hits a hoodie while they are at bat its part of the uni.

 

But same goes if they tag a player on the hood its a tag

 

How do the ladies play long pony tails and such in softball?  If it hits that hair while at bat I assume they award 1b correct?

 

if so why any different for a mans beard unless its in the zone.

 

 

No, sir.  NFHS Softball states the batter must be hit on the body for it to be a hit-by-pitch.  While I consider your hair a part of your person, I do not consider it a part of your body.  Nor would I consider this batter's beard justification for awarding him first base.  Unless it was just for the sheer spectacularity (yes, that is not a word, but a beard of this magnificent magnitude deserves its own term of awesomeness) of his beard, and then I would give him first AND second.

On that regard, USA Softball does say "any part of the batter's person" for its fastpitch rules.  So ... I suppose I'd be wrong there.  I could have sworn there was a caseplay that said NO, but I don't have the ambition to check.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Well, Mr. The Man in Blue, I do have the ambition and I couldn’t find anything that supports your assertion about high school softball rules about HBP. So, I would like you to provide some supporting evidence to your contention that the pitched ball must hit the body and not the hair. Here’s some of what I found--

2020 NFHS Softball rule 2 SECTION 64 TOUCHING

Touching is contact with the ball, equipment or a person. There is no distinction between the act of touching and being touched. It applies to a pitched ball touching a batter, a batted ball touching the batter or any runner, catcher touching the bat, player touching a base, or ball touching a player or non-player. The term applies to contact with any part of the person or her clothing if the clothing is reasonably well fitted.

2020 NFHS Softball rule 8-1-2b and 8-1-2c A pitched ball that is entirely within the batter's box strikes the batter or her clothing. No attempt to avoid the pitch is required. However, the batter may not obviously try to get hit by the pitch. A pitched ball (not entirely in the batter's box) not swung at nor called a strike touches any part of the batter's person or clothing. It does not matter if the ball strikes the ground before hitting the batter. The batter's hands are not to be considered part of the bat. If no attempt is made to avoid being hit, the batter will not be awarded first base unless it is ball four.

The most recent case book I have is the 2019 edition and in it there are four case plays under rule 8 (8.1.2D through G) and I found two case plays about HBP under rule 5 (5.1.1B and C). None of those six case plays mentions that hitting just the hair does not count as a HBP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
On 8/7/2021 at 5:06 PM, The Man in Blue said:

 

No, sir.  NFHS Softball states the batter must be hit on the body for it to be a hit-by-pitch.  While I consider your hair a part of your person, I do not consider it a part of your body.  Nor would I consider this batter's beard justification for awarding him first base.  Unless it was just for the sheer spectacularity (yes, that is not a word, but a beard of this magnificent magnitude deserves its own term of awesomeness) of his beard, and then I would give him first AND second.

On that regard, USA Softball does say "any part of the batter's person" for its fastpitch rules.  So ... I suppose I'd be wrong there.  I could have sworn there was a caseplay that said NO, but I don't have the ambition to check.

In the case of softball, on the bases (although typically tucked into the helmet) if the pony tail of the runner is touched/tagged that is considered part of the person.

I see no reason for the beard to be any different.   On both a tag or a HBP.  He may benefit on a HBP (though in some cases the beard could be in the strike zone)...but he could lose out on the base paths.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
On 8/7/2021 at 7:06 PM, The Man in Blue said:

 

No, sir.  NFHS Softball states the batter must be hit on the body for it to be a hit-by-pitch.  While I consider your hair a part of your person, I do not consider it a part of your body.  Nor would I consider this batter's beard justification for awarding him first base.  Unless it was just for the sheer spectacularity (yes, that is not a word, but a beard of this magnificent magnitude deserves its own term of awesomeness) of his beard, and then I would give him first AND second.

On that regard, USA Softball does say "any part of the batter's person" for its fastpitch rules.  So ... I suppose I'd be wrong there.  I could have sworn there was a caseplay that said NO, but I don't have the ambition to check.

Well LL does state Uniform also.

I warn the coaches up front before the game of this as I am not going to try to make a judgement call on did that hit his hood and not his uniform shirt?  Plus this only typically happens in fall ball and early spring ball.  No one cares coaches wise and they always say yup roll with it.  

If a pitcher throws behind a batter close enough to hit that hood in LL and it hits that hood I'm just gonna say "time" take your base..

If a coach has an issue with it I will remind them of the talk we had before the game in regards of hitting a hoodie..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
On 8/7/2021 at 6:06 PM, The Man in Blue said:

While I consider your hair a part of your person, I do not consider it a part of your body.  Nor would I consider this batter's beard justification for awarding him first base.

Imma have to disagree here.  Aside from the dazzling philosophical debate it could spark - being part of your person, yet not your body - it's just flat-out incorrect.  Where, pray tell, would ones hair come from, if not from one's body?  It's generated from follicles in the body, and emerges through the surface of the skin.  You can't really get much more "part of the body" than that!

Maybe my "outrage," or what passes for it, is because chemo did a number on my hair growth on the top of my head, but I'm still Team Part Of The Body all day.

(Oh .... and yeah - Beardy gets the base when I'm on the stick.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
15 hours ago, Aging_Arbiter said:

You sure you're not doing to much warning, before it's actually warranted?  

Plate meeting, I mention it to both so they are both aware.; That way no issues later if it happens, never had one LL coach say boo about it. To be honest its only happened once in 10U and no one cared when it happened as both coaches knew due to plate meeting that if the hood got hit, it was considered part of the Uni.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
19 hours ago, ArchAngel72 said:

I warn the coaches up front before the game

 

3 hours ago, ArchAngel72 said:

Plate meeting, I mention it to both so they are both aware.

mention vs. warn..........verbiage explains a lot between perceived intent, and just a conversation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
On 8/8/2021 at 5:56 PM, Senor Azul said:

Well, Mr. The Man in Blue, I do have the ambition and I couldn’t find anything that supports your assertion about high school softball rules about HBP. So, I would like you to provide some supporting evidence to your contention that the pitched ball must hit the body and not the hair. Here’s some of what I found--

2020 NFHS Softball rule 2 SECTION 64 TOUCHING

Touching is contact with the ball, equipment or a person. There is no distinction between the act of touching and being touched. It applies to a pitched ball touching a batter, a batted ball touching the batter or any runner, catcher touching the bat, player touching a base, or ball touching a player or non-player. The term applies to contact with any part of the person or her clothing if the clothing is reasonably well fitted.

2020 NFHS Softball rule 8-1-2b and 8-1-2c A pitched ball that is entirely within the batter's box strikes the batter or her clothing. No attempt to avoid the pitch is required. However, the batter may not obviously try to get hit by the pitch. A pitched ball (not entirely in the batter's box) not swung at nor called a strike touches any part of the batter's person or clothing. It does not matter if the ball strikes the ground before hitting the batter. The batter's hands are not to be considered part of the bat. If no attempt is made to avoid being hit, the batter will not be awarded first base unless it is ball four.

The most recent case book I have is the 2019 edition and in it there are four case plays under rule 8 (8.1.2D through G) and I found two case plays about HBP under rule 5 (5.1.1B and C). None of those six case plays mentions that hitting just the hair does not count as a HBP.

 

If we really want to get into semantics, the NFHS Softball rulebook is all over the place.  It makes reference to the ball hitting "she" (2.62), "the batter" (6.1, Exception 3; 7.2.1g;8.5.5), "the batter or her clothing" (7.3.2; 8.2b-c), and "the body" (8.2 Penalties).

The word "hair" is used only three times in the book: all in 3.2.5 which is about "Uniforms and Player Equipment."  It does not state hair is part of the uniform, but instead states what equipment a player can use to control their hair. 

I know your research prowess is better than mine.  I also know your affinity for case plays is better than mine.  You provided a list of case plays and said they DON'T say the hair does not count ... which one says the hair DOES count?

As we all know NFHS (and other orgs) can be all over the place.  I will say my reading leads me to logically conclude hair is NOT included (it is mentioned specifically in one place, none of which have to do with contact with the ball).  You may logically conclude differently and I can understand your POV.  But without a rule specifying, we can't say either of us are right/wrong, just that we disagree.  

To @beerguy55's assertion about a tag on the ponytail ... no, I don't call that a tag.  Why am I going to reward the defense for a girl's fashion sense?  If a defender cannot get a tag on the runner's body proper, I'm not giving her an extra 12-inches of reach because the runner wears her hair in a certain manner.  What if the runner has a religious requirement to wear her hair in a long ponytail?  Should that entitle the defense to an extension on the tag rule?

If we look at other sports, you can say "but football allows you grab a guy's hair" and I can say "but volleyball expressly says a ball touching the hair is not a touch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 hour ago, The Man in Blue said:

 

If we really want to get into semantics, the NFHS Softball rulebook is all over the place.  It makes reference to the ball hitting "she" (2.62), "the batter" (6.1, Exception 3; 7.2.1g;8.5.5), "the batter or her clothing" (7.3.2; 8.2b-c), and "the body" (8.2 Penalties).

The word "hair" is used only three times in the book: all in 3.2.5 which is about "Uniforms and Player Equipment."  It does not state hair is part of the uniform, but instead states what equipment a player can use to control their hair. 

I know your research prowess is better than mine.  I also know your affinity for case plays is better than mine.  You provided a list of case plays and said they DON'T say the hair does not count ... which one says the hair DOES count?

As we all know NFHS (and other orgs) can be all over the place.  I will say my reading leads me to logically conclude hair is NOT included (it is mentioned specifically in one place, none of which have to do with contact with the ball).  You may logically conclude differently and I can understand your POV.  But without a rule specifying, we can't say either of us are right/wrong, just that we disagree.  

To @beerguy55's assertion about a tag on the ponytail ... no, I don't call that a tag.  Why am I going to reward the defense for a girl's fashion sense?  If a defender cannot get a tag on the runner's body proper, I'm not giving her an extra 12-inches of reach because the runner wears her hair in a certain manner.  What if the runner has a religious requirement to wear her hair in a long ponytail?  Should that entitle the defense to an extension on the tag rule?

If we look at other sports, you can say "but football allows you grab a guy's hair" and I can say "but volleyball expressly says a ball touching the hair is not a touch.

But if the pitch hits his shirt sleeve you would award 1st?

In basketball the hair is part of the body. 

Link to comment
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...