NFHS home-run celebration

[thmetcalf]

In our opening HS game, NFHS rules with no association specific language about bench conduct, one of our players hit an over-the-fence homerun and the players in the dugout went out to congratulate him, staying in foul territory near home plate. (I'm the team statistician but also the one who has read the rules most carefully.) The plate umpire told us that, because of a rules change two or three years ago, they should all be ejected for coming out of the dugout.

I think that Casebook 3.3.1 Situation CCC makes it clear that such celebration is permitted, provided the team doesn't interfere with the umpire. I suspect the umpire was thinking of the 2022 point of emphasis about over-the-top celebrations with props and choreographed moves and such.

But my question is about Rule 3.3.1.i: "A ... player ... shall not be outside the designated dugout (bench) or bullpen area if not a batter, runner, on-deck batter, in the coach's box or one of the nine players on defense." This doesn't appear to be restricted to a live ball situation and appears broad enough that an umpire could decide that home-run celebrations were not permitted. But it also seems broad enough to prohibit things like: players chasing down an errant foul ball, players going to the bathroom, or even having a 10th player warm up the left fielder between innings when the team is in the 3rd base dugout.

3.3.1.i seems almost redundant with 3.3.1.a except (i) would be about remaining out of the dugout and (a) is about leaving the dugout. But is there some live-ball provision I'm missing? Can this be used to prohibit home-run celebrations?

[Tborze]

32 minutes ago, thmetcalf said:

In our opening HS game, NFHS rules with no association specific language about bench conduct, one of our players hit an over-the-fence homerun and the players in the dugout went out to congratulate him, staying in foul territory near home plate. (I'm the team statistician but also the one who has read the rules most carefully.) The plate umpire told us that, because of a rules change two or three years ago, they should all be ejected for coming out of the dugout.

I think that Casebook 3.3.1 Situation CCC makes it clear that such celebration is permitted, provided the team doesn't interfere with the umpire. I suspect the umpire was thinking of the 2022 point of emphasis about over-the-top celebrations with props and choreographed moves and such.

But my question is about Rule 3.3.1.i: "A ... player ... shall not be outside the designated dugout (bench) or bullpen area if not a batter, runner, on-deck batter, in the coach's box or one of the nine players on defense." This doesn't appear to be restricted to a live ball situation and appears broad enough that an umpire could decide that home-run celebrations were not permitted. But it also seems broad enough to prohibit things like: players chasing down an errant foul ball, players going to the bathroom, or even having a 10th player warm up the left fielder between innings when the team is in the 3rd base dugout.

3.3.1.i seems almost redundant with 3.3.1.a except (i) would be about remaining out of the dugout and (a) is about leaving the dugout. But is there some live-ball provision I'm missing? Can this be used to prohibit home-run celebrations?

For future reference, Rules are denoted with -  and case plays with a . 
 

Rule 3-3-1 a, specifically states, during a live ball. 
 

Your understanding of the rule is correct. 
 

Inside joke coming: @Velho

Next time, after the play is over, inform the umpire “he is wrong “.  

 

[Senor Azul]

Mr. thmetcalf, your analysis was spot on and you didn't miss anything. The umpire in your game not only misconstrued the rule but also the penalty. The penalty for violation of rule 3-3-1a does not go directly to ejection--there's a warning first.

At the end of playing action, the umpire shall issue a warning to the coach of the team involved and the next offender on that team shall be ejected...

Also the following case book plays may be helpful:

3.3.1 situations A, B, C, D, E and F

Celebrations at or near home plate during live ball have been a Point of Emphasis several times for the FED including 2008-2009 and 2015-2016.

[Mudisfun]

The umpire needs to decide quickly how he wants the game to proceed during a dead ball situation.

Allow the players to come outside the dugout, staying away from home plate and let them cheer and high five as the batter scores and heads to the dugout, you know, like players who are celebrating a HR, or...

Be an over officious umpire who is going to introduce friction where it did not need to be introduced, thus making the crews task of game management that much more difficult.

Provided that the offensive players were not gathering around the home plate area, are being respectful of the other team (no taunting or other action), are not bringing props out and immediately go back into the dugout area with the batter, there should not be anything for the umpire to address. If he thinks it getting close to or on the line, a quick word with the HC should suffice. If after that the celebrations continue to be over the top, then that opens the door to addressing the matter more 'officially'.

My preference is to address what needs to be addressed and not escalate situations when there is nothing to actually address.

[Tborze]

39 minutes ago, Mudisfun said:

The umpire needs to decide quickly how he wants the game to proceed during a dead ball situation.

Allow the players to come outside the dugout, staying away from home plate and let them cheer and high five as the batter scores and heads to the dugout, you know, like players who are celebrating a HR, or...

Be an over officious umpire who is going to introduce friction where it did not need to be introduced, thus making the crews task of game management that much more difficult.

Provided that the offensive players were not gathering around the home plate area, are being respectful of the other team (no taunting or other action), are not bringing props out and immediately go back into the dugout area with the batter, there should not be anything for the umpire to address. If he thinks it getting close to or on the line, a quick word with the HC should suffice. If after that the celebrations continue to be over the top, then that opens the door to addressing the matter more 'officially'.

My preference is to address what needs to be addressed and not escalate situations when there is nothing to actually address.

RIP TimC! Who called them OOO’s. 
 

Not to mention, there is 0 rules support!

[johnnyg08]

7 hours ago, Tborze said:

RIP TimC! Who called them OOO’s. 
 

I miss Tim C. 

[MadMax]

12 hours ago, thmetcalf said:

This doesn't appear to be restricted to a live ball situation and appears broad enough that an umpire could decide that home-run celebrations were not permitted. But it also seems broad enough to prohibit things like: players chasing down an errant foul ball, players going to the bathroom, or even having a 10th player warm up the left fielder between innings when the team is in the 3rd base dugout.

My my… you seem have uncovered the Great Contradiction. 

So a 10th player is prohibited from warming up the F7 (Left Fielder) with a team in the 3rd Base dugout… but not a 10th player in the 1st Base dugout, warming up the F9 (Right Fielder)??  
I’m going to toss you one of my most-fun ones – “Everyone must stay in the dugout”, right? But yet, a Varsity coach can have JV players, in uniform, sit in the stands, directly behind the backstop, and he can add them to the lineup at any time. 

Yeah, some of us are confused, too. 

Rules are tools. All umpires (at least in NFHS) have access to these tools. However, it takes skill to use them. Not everyone has those skills. When faced with an obstacle, do you use a jewelry hammer and a chisel, or det-cord & C4? 

[beerguy55]

11 hours ago, MadMax said:

When faced with an obstacle, do you use a jewelry hammer and a chisel, or det-cord & C4? 

When in doubt, nuke it.

[The Man in Blue]

20 hours ago, MadMax said:

So a 10th player is prohibited from warming up the F7 (Left Fielder) with a team in the 3rd Base dugout… but not a 10th player in the 1st Base dugout, warming up the F9 (Right Fielder)??  

Wait, what?  Where did this one come from?  

20 hours ago, MadMax said:

I’m going to toss you one of my most-fun ones – “Everyone must stay in the dugout”, right? But yet, a Varsity coach can have JV players, in uniform, sit in the stands, directly behind the backstop, and he can add them to the lineup at any time. 

Here is the BS technicality . . . until he adds them to the roster, they are not members of the team.  Not saying I agree (I don't).  IMO, if there is a possibility they will play, they should be on the roster from the get-go, not added willy-nilly.  This is one of those rules where I can appreciate what NFHS is attempting to do, but no.

21 hours ago, MadMax said:

Rules are tools. All umpires (at least in NFHS) have access to these tools. However, it takes skill to use them. Not everyone has those skills. When faced with an obstacle, do you use a jewelry hammer and a chisel, or det-cord & C4? 

I cannot like or love that enough.

[The Man in Blue]

On @MadMax's "rules are tools" front . . . 

I am looking at the 2018 Case Book (did I ever mention that was the last year NFHS allowed them to be sold on Kindle?  😁) and there is another phrase in there that I love:

 

It is nice to see a Case Play that focuses on THE INTENT of the rule and encouraging common sense umpiring, instead of telling us to apply some made-up interpretation in an effort to replace a rule that they cant get changed in committee.

That said, here is another:

 

I'm not sure where that is authorized (quick searches didn't get it), but it is good to see common sense.

 

[BigBlue4u]

4 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

On @MadMax's "rules are tools" front . . . 

I am looking at the 2018 Case Book (did I ever mention that was the last year NFHS allowed them to be sold on Kindle?  😁) and there is another phrase in there that I love:

 

It is nice to see a Case Play that focuses on THE INTENT of the rule and encouraging common sense umpiring, instead of telling us to apply some made-up interpretation in an effort to replace a rule that they cant get changed in committee.

That said, here is another:

 

I'm not sure where that is authorized (quick searches didn't get it), but it is good to see common sense.

 

 

[beerguy55]

13 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

It is nice to see a Case Play that focuses on THE INTENT of the rule and encouraging common sense umpiring, instead of telling us to apply some made-up interpretation in an effort to replace a rule that they cant get changed in committee.

This is so important, and I wish it would be communicated more at all levels - you almost need a one day seminar...Why Does This Rule Exist?  Umpires, coaches, players and parents may attend.

This was the crux of the George Brett pine tar protest.  AL president had to clarify that the intent of the rule was to reduce costs, not to address some competitive advantage (there was none) to having too much pine tar on the bat.  A bit "cute" in retrospect now that 40 years later a MLB baseball almost never sees a second batter, let alone a second inning.