johnnyg08 Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 Baseball Points of Emphasis - 2025 By NFHS on August 12, 2024baseball Share Print The NFHS Baseball Rules Committee and the NFHS Board of Directors believe there are areas of the game of interscholastic baseball that need to be addressed and given special attention. These areas of concern are often cyclical, some areas need more attention than others, and that is why they might appear in the rules book for consecutive editions. These concerns are identified as “Points of Emphasis.” For the 2025 high school baseball season, attention is being called to: Use of Authenticated Mark Program balls, Proper Pitching Positions, Bench Decorum, Use of Props, and Improper Use of Electronic Communication Equipment. When a topic is included in the Points of Emphasis, these topics are important enough to reinforce throughout the academic year because they are not being given proper attention. Use of Authenticated Mark Program Balls The use of baseballs that have the Authenticated Mark printed on them proves that the conforming equipment is essential to the integrity of contests played under the NFHS rules. This program helps to promote a level playing field by ensuring consistency in the equipment being used. Using baseballs that hold the Authenticating Mark allows for the development of more sophisticated standards in balls and clearly communicates to administrators, coaches and officials that these standards are being met. Pitching Positions The premise of the pitching positions is very basic, it has evolved over the years to stay current with existing teaching styles and the increasing skill levels of high school age students. It is one of the most talked about and modified rules in the history of NFHS rules writing. We should always be cautious and concerned that the reasons to change the rule is never associated to the whims or trends of other levels of baseball. Pitchers are required to use one of two positions: the wind-up or the set. It is important that umpires, coaches, and players know what position the pitcher is using so they know which part of Rule 6 is in play. The position of the pivot foot determines which of the pitching positions is being used. In the wind-up position, the pitcher’s pivot foot is in contact with the pitcher’s plate and is not parallel to it. They may only deliver a pitch or step backward off the pitcher’s plate with the pivot first. In the set position, the pivot foot is in contact with or directly in front of and parallel to the pitcher’s plate. Bench Decorum Sportsmanship, or good sporting behavior, is about treating one another with respect and exhibiting appropriate behavior. It is about being fair, honest and caring. When these types of appropriate behavior occur, competitive play is more enjoyable for everyone. Coaches set the tone at athletic contests with their display of sportsmanship and respect. If these individuals act in a sportsmanlike manner, manage the students in their dugout/bench area, their behavior sets a positive tone for players, spectators and others. Use of Props Like Bench Decorum, there is no logical purpose to have props at an education based athletic event. They are not enhancing the educational value of the contest. In fact, they deter from any valuable lesson gained from competing. Unlike the collegiate and professional models, the use of props or any items to demean or embarrass one’s opponent is contrary to the reason the NFHS writes playing rules for high school age and skilled students. Improper Use of Communication Equipment Last season was the first year of allowing one-way electronic communication devices from the dugout/bench to the catcher. It permits the coach to communicate with the catcher using an electronic communication device for the purpose of calling pitches and setting up the defense. The device would only be able to be one-way, meaning the player cannot use an electronic device to respond or communicate back to the coach. Various technologies, ear-piece style, electronic band or a smart watch could be used giving schools several options at varying costs. No other player would be able to wear or use this device nor would the coach be able to communicate with any other player using electronic communication.
Richvee Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 Leave it to FED to emphasise something that isn't explicitly laid out in the rules. Props are never mentioned in the rulebook, and no specific penalty is listed. Sure, it falls under 3-3-1 (f). Is it a warning to the kid who brings it out? Is it a warning to the coach? Is it "major" and the kid bringing it out is ejected? How about the coach? Is it illegal to put a funny coat on a kid in the dugout? 1
Replacematt Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 1 hour ago, Richvee said: Is it illegal to put a funny coat on a kid in the dugout? What if it's three kids doing it to pretend to be an adult? 4
Replacematt Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 1 hour ago, johnnyg08 said: Unlike the collegiate and professional models, the use of props or any items to demean or embarrass one’s opponent is contrary to the reason the NFHS writes playing rules for high school age and skilled students. Da F*#K does this mean? NCAA wants props to piss off opponents? 'Cause that's how this is worded... 1
SeeingEyeDog Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 39 minutes ago, Richvee said: Leave it to FED to emphasise something that isn't explicitly laid out in the rules. Props are never mentioned in the rulebook, and no specific penalty is listed. Sure, it falls under 3-3-1 (f). Is it a warning to the kid who brings it out? Is it a warning to the coach? Is it "major" and the kid bringing it out is ejected? How about the coach? Is it illegal to put a funny coat on a kid in the dugout? There's been more discussion of this amongst my local association than anything else rules related this pre-season. LOL...and of course, every time I speak with someone new about it, I get another interpretation. Should be another "fun" spring since there's no clear codification of something NFHS and most of us around The Game don't want in The Game. My personal interpretation is...This should be covered in pre-game plate meetings. Something, something..."Coaches, as a reminder, NFHS has issued a point of emphasis that props are not permitted. Please be advised, the use of props could result in a player and or head coach being dismissed from the game." Regardless of whether I issue a warning or ejection, if I see a prop on the field during a game I am working, I am absolutely mentioning it in my post-game report to my assigner as I know they will engage with the state athletic association appropriately. As Richvee states, without specific rules codification, it's tough to know how your market wants this adjudicated. I would encourage all of you to discuss this with your local association(s) or leagues or state athletic associations. ~Dawg 1
Replacematt Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 1 hour ago, Richvee said: Leave it to FED to emphasise something that isn't explicitly laid out in the rules. Props are never mentioned in the rulebook, and no specific penalty is listed. Sure, it falls under 3-3-1 (f). Is it a warning to the kid who brings it out? Is it a warning to the coach? Is it "major" and the kid bringing it out is ejected? How about the coach? Is it illegal to put a funny coat on a kid in the dugout? Seriously... It would have to fall under 3-3-1f as you mentioned. Subsection 2 is the only one I see that could govern this, and that is for things directed at the opponent. Combine that with "the use of props or any items to demean or embarrass one’s opponent," and that tells me that I don't need to care about anything that isn't sending shots across the field. Put a crown on the homerun king. Oversized jockstrap for the play with the biggest balls? Go for it. 1
kylehutson Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 34 minutes ago, SeeingEyeDog said: This should be covered in pre-game plate meetings. ...OR you could keep from having rules clinic at the plate meeting and just KISS. 😁 2
Richvee Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 29 minutes ago, SeeingEyeDog said: There's been more discussion of this amongst my local association than anything else rules related this pre-season. LOL...and of course, every time I speak with someone new about it, I get another interpretation. Should be another "fun" spring since there's no clear codification of something NFHS and most of us around The Game don't want in The Game. My personal interpretation is...This should be covered in pre-game plate meetings. Something, something..."Coaches, as a reminder, NFHS has issued a point of emphasis that props are not permitted. Please be advised, the use of props could result in a player and or head coach being dismissed from the game." Regardless of whether I issue a warning or ejection, if I see a prop on the field during a game I am working, I am absolutely mentioning it in my post-game report to my assigner as I know they will engage with the state athletic association appropriately. As Richvee states, without specific rules codification, it's tough to know how your market wants this adjudicated. I would encourage all of you to discuss this with your local association(s) or leagues or state athletic associations. ~Dawg Our local association meeting isn't until the end of the month. I did run into our local association rules interpreter and I brought this up he, looked at me kinda funny and said, "It's a warning". When I said "To who? The kid bringing out the prop? The coach?,both?" ..I got that funny look again. A warning is pretty ridiculous if you ask me. It essentially says "You can bring props out and celebrate the first HR, after that, the next player? Coach? is ejected? restricted? My solution would be coach restriction after the first offence. Player and coach EJ for 2nd. But that's not the rule. I'm never in favor of warnings at the plate meeting. We are in NJ, where we read the sportsmanship "warning" to each team prior to the game. Perhaps just add "props" in there with "There will be no tolerance for any negative behaviour, such as taunting, trash talking, PROPS and verbal, written, or physical conduct related to race, gender, ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation, or religion. Such behaviour will result in being ejected from this event." Why not just add another word 😩
SeeingEyeDog Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 37 minutes ago, kylehutson said: ...OR you could keep from having rules clinic at the plate meeting and just KISS. 😁 LOL! I get what you're saying, K-Hut... I would argue that two sentences at the plate meeting on a POE that is not fully codified in the rules is not a rules clinic. That's pre-emptive umpiring. That way when a player sprays Let's GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO on the field with lighter fluid and sets it off with a Roman Candle after bunting for a single nobody is surprised when I dump them... The real fun is going to come playoff time when the college guys come down to work these games and bring their own all new interpretations...zero offense intended to anyone. ~Dawg
Velho Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 9 minutes ago, SeeingEyeDog said: The real fun is going to come playoff time when the college guys come down to work these games and bring their own all new interpretations...zero offense intended to anyone. Not to hijack the thread but... Are these umpires that were splitting time college and HS? Or solely college and then HS once college season ends?
Replacematt Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 53 minutes ago, SeeingEyeDog said: The real fun is going to come playoff time when the college guys come down to work these games and bring their own all new interpretations...zero offense intended to anyone. If FED had simply adopted the NCAA rule, then this wouldn't be an issue, and it would be easy to officiate. If it's out of the dugout? Eject the offender. Directed at umpire/opponent? Eject, or warn then eject. If they intend for it to be enforced using only existing rules, as per my analysis above, then only the second half applies. NFHS 3-3-1f(2) is cognate with NCAA 5-15-d(1.)
834k3r Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 3 hours ago, Richvee said: Leave it to FED to [emphasize] something that isn't explicitly laid out in the rules. Props are never mentioned in the rulebook, and no specific penalty is listed. Sure, it falls under 3-3-1 (f). Is it a warning to the kid who brings it out? Is it a warning to the coach? Is it "major" and the kid bringing it out is ejected? How about the coach? Is it illegal to put a funny coat on a kid in the dugout? Between this POE and the reiteration of what's from the wind-up and what's from the stretch, it really feels like NFHS first wants to be like the NCAA (please, please, please implement live ball balks next!), but also is picking a fight where there wasn't contention before (not that they've ever done that before <cough> eyeblackandjewelry <cough>). I had a lengthy conversation with a fellow umpire about these topics last night, but part of me still wonders what the heck NFHS is doing. 1
Replacematt Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 The more I look at this, the more my peeves are getting petted. The pretentiousness... "We should always be cautious and concerned that the reasons to change the rule is never associated to the whims or trends of other levels of baseball." "Unlike the collegiate and professional models..." Do they make shirts with expandable chests to accommodate the amount they are being puffed? "It's not a cookie sport, Mother, it's a(n) Fruit Newton interscholastic competition." Dare I point out yet another wording that means (I...hope? assume?) the opposite of what they actually mean: "Like Bench Decorum, there is no logical purpose to have props at an education based athletic event." So, there's no logical purpose for bench decorum? If this is an extension of the classroom, it sure ain't the English classroom. 3
johnnyg08 Posted February 12 Author Report Posted February 12 I mean, how often do they think it's gonna happen? They essentially get one free one per game (each team) It's like a warning on a balk. I'll take a warning and an out all day long.
The Man in Blue Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 5 hours ago, kylehutson said: ...OR you could keep from having rules clinic at the plate meeting and just KISS. 😁 ???? 1
The Man in Blue Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 Coach, the NFHS wants us to make sure you are aware of their Point of Emphasis on the use of props during the game. To ensure that I am emphasizing that correctly, I want to emphasize there is no explicit rule that we are pointing to or emphasizing. That said, those stupid oven mitts are props if your kids refuse to slide. Therefore, a kid not sliding while wearing an oven mitt will be ejected. Kids who bring a bat to the plate and don't swing it will be assumed to be using the bat as a prop. They will be ejected. The same goes for a kid in the field who doesn't use his glove. Hang on a second . . . coach, what are your kids wearing? Are those matching uniforms? That is embarrassing the other team, I'm going to have to eject any kid in uniform if they come out of the dugout. 1 2
BLWizzRanger Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 When does it become a prop? If a kid is just wearing an rake on a chain around his neck, maybe that is a new fashion statement they are trying to start. Whom am I to say? I guess if the game is an extension of the classroom, then we should ignore the chalk/white boards, erasers, globes, projectors, and pull down maps hanging in there?
Kevin_K Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 18 hours ago, Richvee said: We are in NJ, where we read the sportsmanship "warning" to each team prior to the game. Perhaps just add "props" in there with "There will be no tolerance for any negative behaviour, such as taunting, trash talking, PROPS and verbal, written, or physical conduct related to race, gender, ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation, or religion. Such behaviour will result in being ejected from this event." Its taunting. By NJSIAA edict, such behavior will result in being ejected, no?
SeeingEyeDog Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 17 hours ago, 834k3r said: (please, please, please implement live ball balks next!) I just had an online rules clinic with our state athletic association last night. The director mentioned that there are some "test markets" around the country that are playing under live balk rules for NFHS games...stay tuned, I guess. ~Dawg
BLWizzRanger Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 22 minutes ago, SeeingEyeDog said: I just had an online rules clinic with our state athletic association last night. The director mentioned that there are some "test markets" around the country that are playing under live balk rules for NFHS games...stay tuned, I guess. ~Dawg GA and AZ. 1
Richvee Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 1 hour ago, Kevin_K said: Its taunting. By NJSIAA edict, such behavior will result in being ejected, no? That's defendabale. And I agree with the penalty.
834k3r Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 4 hours ago, SeeingEyeDog said: I just had an online rules clinic with our state athletic association last night. The director mentioned that there are some "test markets" around the country that are playing under live balk rules for NFHS games...stay tuned, I guess. ~Dawg It's true--and I hope AZ and GA testing shows live balks are the way to go.
jimurrayalterego Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 39 minutes ago, 834k3r said: It's true--and I hope AZ and GA testing shows live balks are the way to go. Did they specify to keep a balk live as per the MLBUM instructions? Because we had some question about wild pitch balks from some seasoned umpires in another thread.
834k3r Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 10 minutes ago, jimurrayalterego said: Did they specify to keep a balk live as per the MLBUM instructions? Because we had some question about wild pitch balks from some seasoned umpires in another thread. Great question and certainly a germane point. The cynic in me says that of course they won't follow the MLBUM. They're FED after all.
Richvee Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 19 minutes ago, 834k3r said: They're FED after all I thought you were gonna say "They'll FED it up" 2
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now