Two very poorly thought out local league rules

[FourthOut]

A local Cal Ripken league that I've umpired in for a few years (and also played in as a kid) just enacted two frankly asinine new rules. 

First, they changed the lightning policy so that now, if "the umpire or either head coach sees lightning," there is an automatic 15-minute delay. In case you didn't already notice the problem with this, now any coach can delay a game indefinitely, as long as they "see" lightning. Imagine you're at a CR field with no lights, and it's an evening game with dark clouds in the sky. You're the home coach, up 1 run in the top of the 5th (6 inning games), and the other team has RISP. You open up your phone, glance down at your weather radar, and see a wall of red about 30 minutes away. As you ponder whether they'll be able to finish the inning in time, the road team knocks in the tying run.

"Blue, that's lightning back behind home plate."

"I don't see any lightning, Keith." (knowing Keith, there probably hasn't even been thunder yet)

"Well, I saw lightning. League rules, we have to stop play for 15 minutes."

When we resume play 15 or so minutes later, it's almost impossible to finish the inning before the actual lightning starts. The subsequent deluge renders the field unplayable, ending the game, and the score reverts back to the previous inning, meaning the home team wins. 

The second moronic rule involves batters being out of the box. Last year during playoffs, I called a few kids from an especially vocal town out for being out of the box when they hit the ball. This year, the league wrote explicitly that batters who hit the ball while "any part of their body is touching outside of" the batter's box are out at the Majors level (Minors players receive a warning the first time they do it, which was the basis for the rule change). See the problem here? They accidentally (I assume) rewrote the definition of being out of the box so now, instead of the batter's foot having to be completely out of the box for him to be called out, he can be called out if any part of his foot is touching outside the box. Get ready for a flurry of angry managers and fans if umpires actually start to enforce this.

Fortunately, I don't work a ton of games in this league anymore (I've sort of pivoted towards HS ball), but what would you do with these rules as an umpire? The UIC hasn't issued clarifications, and to make matters worse. We could make the coaches show proof of lightning (there are websites that do this). Do we even enforce the batter's box rule?

[Velho]

Is this official Little League? (I see the terms Majors/Minors)

[FourthOut]

This is Cal Ripken. Majors is 50/70 with leading and stealing (divided into Majors A, with balks; and Majors B, with balk warnings only and a per inning run limit), Minors is 46/60 with no leading and a lot of special rules.

[Velho]

2 hours ago, FourthOut said:

The second moronic rule involves batters being out of the box. Last year during playoffs, I called a few kids from an especially vocal town out for being out of the box when they hit the ball. This year, the league wrote explicitly that batters who hit the ball while "any part of their body is touching outside of" the batter's box are out at the Majors level (Minors players receive a warning the first time they do it, which was the basis for the rule change).

Grasping for silver lining - they were well intentioned in supporting you on those calls by POE/changing the rules?

 

[JonnyCat]

2 hours ago, FourthOut said:

and the score reverts back to the previous inning, meaning the home team wins. 

This is the problem with revert back rules. They are always subject to manipulation, stall tactics, etc. Get rid of that rule. Just suspend the game and continue it at a later date. Now you'll have coaches hurrying the game along.

2 hours ago, FourthOut said:

The second moronic rule involves batters being out of the box. Last year during playoffs, I called a few kids from an especially vocal town out for being out of the box when they hit the ball.

Not directed at you, but this situation has caused much discussion over the years.

I absolutely despise this rule. Not so much the rule, but the application of it from some umpires. I've never called it in 23 years of umpiring, from College summer ball to LL minors, and everything in between. The rule is there for the obvious violation, such as a batter squaring to bunt with their foot on the plate that even Grandma in the stands can see. Or the LH batter trying to gain an advantage on a drag bunt.

You mean to tell me that if an umpire is tracking the pitch properly, and seeing the ball off the bat, they're going to be able to see with 100% conclusivity that the batters foot was entirely on the ground outside the batters box when contact with the ball was made? Answer: they can't. Especially when it's the 3rd or 4th game on a field with no chalking in between games. At that point, the umpire is just guessing, or was watching the feet and not the pitch.

If you're doing your job properly tracking pitches as a PU, you'll never see this. Not at least with any amount of certainty. As a long time rules and mechanics instructor in my area, I always tell people, "don't make this your best call."

If a coach wants to bitch about this, (hint, they never see it either, they're just guessing), tell them you're watching the pitch and not the feet.

[orangebird]

3 hours ago, JonnyCat said:

You mean to tell me that if an umpire is tracking the pitch properly, and seeing the ball off the bat, they're going to be able to see with 100% conclusivity that the batters foot was entirely on the ground outside the batters box when contact with the ball was made? Answer: they can't. Especially when it's the 3rd or 4th game on a field with no chalking in between games. At that point, the umpire is just guessing, or was watching the feet and not the pitch.

LOL yeah I'm only through 2 games behind the plate and neither of them have had the chalk in-tact enough for me to even consider making a call on that

[SeeingEyeDog]

@FourthOut, you're entitled to your opinion, of course...

Lightning related protocols can be problematic. What works in say Oregon is perhaps not what's going to work in Tampa, FL or parts of Texas or Oklahoma. I've worked leagues where it's purely the umpire's decision. I've worked leagues where it "must be cloud to ground lightning". And I've worked leagues where (like your example) ANY lightning seen by an umpire or coach is an immediate delay.

With all due respect...YOU are choosing to work for this league and you do so knowing their rules about lightning are as you described. That...is the deal.

If you think your lightning rules should be something else, then fire off an email to your UIC or league leadership or attend a meeting. (Before doing that I would consider whether or not as an umpire you want to be on the record advocating for a LESS SAFE lightning policy...)

Regardless, until such time that the league changes their lightning protocols, I would simply continue to administer their policies as they have declared they want them administered, work hard and collect your fee (or log the game)...and go home.

~Dawg

[LouisB]

Nope on both!

1) Once the game starts the decision to suspend due to weather is up to the umpire, not a manager/coach.

2) As stated, the rule is the whole foot on the ground outside the box, a local rule cannot over-ride a rulebook rule.

As they say: local rules are made by fools!

[FourthOut]

6 hours ago, JonnyCat said:

This is the problem with revert back rules. They are always subject to manipulation, stall tactics, etc. Get rid of that rule. Just suspend the game and continue it at a later date. Now you'll have coaches hurrying the game along.

The only thing worse than being the umpire who has to drive back the next day to work the last inning and a half of a suspended game for free is being the assignor who has to find an ump willing to replace a guy who can't make it to the resumed game.

As for the batter's box rule, it's gotta be pretty flagrant for me to call it under normal circumstances. I wouldn't say I'm looking at the batter's foot when he hits the ball; usually I'll notice a batter is way out of the box after contact takes place and then corroborate by looking for where the cleat marks are (on a dirt field). Still, to @JonnyCat's point, I can't ever see myself making the batter's box a point of emphasis, especially not when it comes to this rule.

1 hour ago, SeeingEyeDog said:

Lightning related protocols can be problematic. What works in say Oregon is perhaps not what's going to work in Tampa, FL or parts of Texas or Oklahoma. I've worked leagues where it's purely the umpire's decision. I've worked leagues where it "must be cloud to ground lightning". And I've worked leagues where (like your example) ANY lightning seen by an umpire or coach is an immediate delay.

All good advice you gave me about enforcing the rule. For the record, this league is in Massachusetts. 

1 hour ago, SeeingEyeDog said:

I would consider whether or not as an umpire you want to be on the record advocating for a LESS SAFE lightning policy...)

The umpire having the sole authority to suspend a game once it has started is one hill I'm willing to die on.

[SeeingEyeDog]

1 hour ago, FourthOut said:

The umpire having the sole authority to suspend a game once it has started is one hill I'm willing to die on.

Right...short of having automated lightning detection systems that sound a klaxon on the field when lightning is detected in the vicinity, giving the umpire sole authority to suspend a game is the hill we are all willing to die on.

The problem in your case is...you have a league that has different rules than giving the umpire sole authority. If you actively advocate in writing and or at meetings ("on the record") to restore sole authority to the umpire working the game and someone gets hurt because an umpire didn't suspend the game now you could have some liability. Why take on liability unnecessarily? (I presume you do "legally and properly equipped" at your plate meetings...)

Google says 40 people are killed annually by lightning and roughly 400 others are injured so, admittedly, this is a small number...

~Dawg

[MadMax]

21 hours ago, FourthOut said:

if "the umpire or either head coach sees lightning," there is an automatic 15-minute delay.

 

12 hours ago, LouisB said:

1) Once the game starts the decision to suspend due to weather is up to the umpire, not a manager/coach.

I can tell you exactly why they enacted this rule. It’s either/both of these reasons: 

1. With 12Us, there’s an increased likelihood of younger-than-18 year old umpires. Due to legal/liability issues, I don’t care how rationally capable a “kid” umpire is, he (or she) should never be burdened with making a decision like this. What the (local) league is hoping/expecting is that the two other adults can make that “executive”, responsible decision, at least to delay and see what happens, thus reducing liability. 
2. They’ve got a rash of adult umpires who either wait too long, making fans anxious (and in today’s culture, anxiety and apprehension runs way above the red line), or they “end” the game far too quick and early, because they don’t want to be held liable, or they’ve gotten fed up with the game’s proceedings, and want to go home on full pay. 

I’m not implying that @FourthOut is one of those guys; I’m simply saying those guys exist. I’ve worked with ‘em. 🙄 

It behooves the league to have a responsible adult present and/or directly available. Even a field custodian qualifies, provided that they’re A) an adult, B) not (directly) affiliated with either team playing, and C) designated by the league to perform this role. From an officiating standpoint, this is often an UIC; from a league standpoint, especially when there’s multiple games at a multiple-field complex, this is a league rep. 

But, I can already see where this is going… because this is local, and likely on one field on its own, the HHC is the field custodian, groundskeeper, and “responsible adult” all rolled into one, because, of course, the league can’t afford any other positions and roles. 
🤷🏼‍♂️

And then they treat it like it’s the World Series. 

[LouisB]

In Little League if there is no adult umpire (youth umpire(s) being used), there must be an adult Game Coordinator assigned to the field/game.  One of the duties of the GC is to determine when to suspend the game due to weather/field conditions, as you say, don't leave that decision up to a youth.

[FourthOut]

3 hours ago, MadMax said:

I can tell you exactly why they enacted this rule. It’s either/both of these reasons: 

1. With 12Us, there’s an increased likelihood of younger-than-18 year old umpires.

It's this one. Since most towns in our league don't assign through the state association anymore, there have been a lot of "patched" umpires who are 16 or 17 working both Majors and Minors games, and Minors umps can be as young as 12.

On that note, I was working summer ball last year at a 3-field complex in town where one of the games had a 13-year-old ump working alone. It was extremely rainy, and I called my game when I saw standing water on the field. The guy working field 2 did the same thing. Meanwhile, the kid ump on field 3 kept playing. I went over and told him, "Remember, it's your job to pause or end the game. Usually, I end the game when I can see puddles of water on the field."

"OK," he said, turned around, and kept playing. His dad was as confused as I was that he wasn't calling the game.

[MadMax]

1 hour ago, FourthOut said:

I went over and told him, "Remember, it's your job to pause or end the game. Usually, I end the game when I can see puddles of water on the field."

This is no criticism of you, @FourthOut, but I would have ended the game for him, and I would have had my fellow (adult) umpire(s) – who ended their concurrent games for the same reasons I just did – in lock-step with me. 
No sub-18 umpire should have that burden or responsibility placed on him (or her). None. 

Or, had the kid told me, “I just gotta get 3 (or 2, or 1) more out.”, then I would have stayed in support (behind the fence, mind you). Things could take a turn (for the worse); parents can get mighty disagreeable, and even two adult coaches, who were onboard with “playing this out” can turn on ya, and change their tune when a play doesn’t go their way, caused or exacerbated by the weather (rain, in this case). 

What just struck me, and doesn’t make any sense with this new rule for this league – if there are multiple games underway on the same complex… what are the other fields doing if someone “saw lightning”??? Are all games stopping / pausing / delaying for 15 minutes?? There’s a legal and responsible obligation to do so! 

Didn’t think of that didja league?? 

[JonnyCat]

16 hours ago, FourthOut said:

I wouldn't say I'm looking at the batter's foot when he hits the ball; usually I'll notice a batter is way out of the box after contact takes place and then corroborate by looking for where the cleat marks are (on a dirt field).

How do you know where the foot was at the exact moment the bat struck the ball? Was the foot still in the air when contact was made? Is there still chalk lines for the batters box?

If you're not looking at the batters foot, by you're own admission, how do you know that it was on the ground entirely outside the box when contact with the ball was made? You're just guessing at that point. Don't guess.

You have to be watching the ball off the bat, too. Are we looking at the batter instead of picking up the ball and knowing where it is going? What about that hotshot down the line where you have fair/foul responsibilities? Are we more concerned where the batters feet are than where the ball is going? By the time you pick up the ball, the BR could be a step or two outside the box already. What then?

My point is, and I know I'm beating a dead horse, but if someone is doing their job as a PU tracking the pitch and then the batted ball, you'll never see if there was this violation or not. It seems like many umpires fixate on this rule, when it is very low on the priority list of PU's responsibilities. The rule is there to catch the obvious scofflaws, not because a PU might "think" there was a violation.

Anyway,  

[Slippery Fish]

Can BU call an out for hitting with the foot outside of the batter’s box, or is that soley a PU responsibility? It seems like the BU, especially in B or C, would have a better chance of actually seeing if it happened. 

[MadMax]

43 minutes ago, Slippery Fish said:

Can BU call an out for hitting with the foot outside of the batter’s box, or is that soley a PU responsibility?

Said kindly, Fish, don't go here. Nothing good comes from this. 

[jimurrayalterego]

7 hours ago, JonnyCat said:

 

My point is, and I know I'm beating a dead horse, but if someone is doing their job as a PU tracking the pitch and then the batted ball, you'll ALMOST ALWAYS never see if there was this violation or not. It seems like many umpires fixate on this rule, when it is very low on the priority list of PU's responsibilities. The rule is there to catch the obvious scofflaws, not because a PU might "think" there was a violation.

Anyway,  

Added the bold. I have had the right pitch location and foot location to call this once or twice when I wasn't even fixated and it jumped up and grabbed me.

[Replacematt]

On 4/9/2025 at 2:57 PM, JonnyCat said:

This is the problem with revert back rules. They are always subject to manipulation, stall tactics, etc. Get rid of that rule. Just suspend the game and continue it at a later date. Now you'll have coaches hurrying the game along.

I love the NCAA's halted game rule because of this, and...

On 4/9/2025 at 10:12 PM, FourthOut said:

The only thing worse than being the umpire who has to drive back the next day to work the last inning and a half of a suspended game for free

Why for free? We halted a college game two days ago with the home team leading at the start of the ninth. Full game fee for the resumption last night...first pitch at 5:00, off the field at 5:02. 

8 hours ago, Slippery Fish said:

Can BU call an out for hitting with the foot outside of the batter’s box, or is that soley a PU responsibility? It seems like the BU, especially in B or C, would have a better chance of actually seeing if it happened. 

And coincidentally, this is something visiting AC asked me shortly before halting...not a chance.

[Kevin_K]

Two games in my umpiring experience has a batters foot been alleged to have been on the ground outside the batter's box when making contact with a pitched ball. Neither one was so egregious that even casual observers would have taken notice.

Both times I spoke to the aggrieved DHC about the circumstances. One was a pants on fire coach and the other was not. Both received the same response from me.

"I can watch each pitch or I can watch every batter's feet. Which would you like me to watch?"

Both returned to their dugout and the issue was suddenly no longer an issue.

 

[beerguy55]

On 4/9/2025 at 10:48 AM, FourthOut said:

First, they changed the lightning policy so that now, if "the umpire or either head coach sees lightning," there is an automatic 15-minute delay. In case you didn't already notice the problem with this, now any coach can delay a game indefinitely, as long as they "see" lightning. Imagine you're at a CR field with no lights, and it's an evening game with dark clouds in the sky. You're the home coach, up 1 run in the top of the 5th (6 inning games), and the other team has RISP. You open up your phone, glance down at your weather radar, and see a wall of red about 30 minutes away. As you ponder whether they'll be able to finish the inning in time, the road team knocks in the tying run.

The last thing this rule is is asinine.   Often times the first bolt of lightning is too late...what I'm not going to do is support a rule that says that the lightning MUST be seen/verified by an umpire before anyone does anything...meaning now we're waiting for a second incidence of lightning before reacting.

Because the flip side is the umpire who is obtuse enough to "not see" lightning to avoid adding a 15-30+ minute delay to his time at the field. And make no mistake...I've seen THAT umpire more often than you've see THAT coach.

You're just going to have to trust the adults to be adults, and if there's evidence that they're abusing the situation, see if it can be dealt with.

First - the scenario where a coach may want to fake a lightning sighting is going to be very rare.  Incredibly rare.

Second - now you have to have the coach who's willing to do it...which will also not be nearly as common as you think.

You're looking for monsters under the bed to argue against an appropriate safety-based protocol.

On 4/9/2025 at 7:47 PM, LouisB said:

Nope on both!

1) Once the game starts the decision to suspend due to weather is up to the umpire, not a manager/coach.

2) As stated, the rule is the whole foot on the ground outside the box, a local rule cannot over-ride a rulebook rule.

As they say: local rules are made by fools!

I see lightning, I'm pulling the players.  The ump can shove his decision up his ass, and I've said those exact words in the exact situation.  In my scenario, the other coach was on the same page as me, and neither of us really cared what the umpire wanted to do, but, if necessary, I'll take the forfeit, and then I'll very publicly make it known what happened.  

 

And to dispel the myth about local/ground rules not over-riding the rulebook - see Tropicana's rules about fly balls hitting the catwalk, and their eligibility to still be caught for an out.
 

[jimurrayalterego]

29 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

 

I see lightning, I'm pulling the players.  The ump can shove his decision up his ass, and I've said those exact words in the exact situation.  In my scenario, the other coach was on the same page as me, and neither of us really cared what the umpire wanted to do, but, if necessary, I'll take the forfeit, and then I'll very publicly make it known what happened.  

 

 

In Texas you can see "heat lightning" more than 50 miles away. The US NOAA advises stopping/vacating upon hearing thunder. That indicates convective activity that can produce lightning is within 10 miles. You don't have to see a bolt. Of course a bolt that is easily recognized as within your vicinity would also indicate stopping/vacating. What does your Canadian counterpart recommend?

[JonnyCat]

50 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

The last thing this rule is is asinine.   Often times the first bolt of lightning is too late...what I'm not going to do is support a rule that says that the lightning MUST be seen/verified by an umpire before anyone does anything...meaning now we're waiting for a second incidence of lightning before reacting.

Because the flip side is the umpire who is obtuse enough to "not see" lightning to avoid adding a 15-30+ minute delay to his time at the field. And make no mistake...I've seen THAT umpire more often than you've see THAT coach.

You're just going to have to trust the adults to be adults, and if there's evidence that they're abusing the situation, see if it can be dealt with.

First - the scenario where a coach may want to fake a lightning sighting is going to be very rare.  Incredibly rare.

Second - now you have to have the coach who's willing to do it...which will also not be nearly as common as you think.

You're looking for monsters under the bed to argue against an appropriate safety-based protocol.

I see lightning, I'm pulling the players.  The ump can shove his decision up his ass, and I've said those exact words in the exact situation.  In my scenario, the other coach was on the same page as me, and neither of us really cared what the umpire wanted to do, but, if necessary, I'll take the forfeit, and then I'll very publicly make it known what happened.  

 

And to dispel the myth about local/ground rules not over-riding the rulebook - see Tropicana's rules about fly balls hitting the catwalk, and their eligibility to still be caught for an out.
 

Excellent post! You are spot on.

Too many times people let their ego or "authority" get in the way of common sense.

[beerguy55]

1 hour ago, jimurrayalterego said:

In Texas you can see "heat lightning" more than 50 miles away. The US NOAA advises stopping/vacating upon hearing thunder. That indicates convective activity that can produce lightning is within 10 miles. You don't have to see a bolt. Of course a bolt that is easily recognized as within your vicinity would also indicate stopping/vacating. What does your Canadian counterpart recommend?

I don't recall if it's universal across the country, but I think it is.

I'm in the prairies and we can see heat lightning a lot too, though your traditional bolt is more prevalent.  See lightning, 30-minute delay.  Period.  I don't remember the rules about hearing thunder.  Even if the heat lightning is that far away, I think the thinking is that everyone still needs time to get into cover...and these storms can move fast when they roll over the mountains.

All the protocols were changed when, about 30 years ago, a player was killed in a Babe Ruth League national championship in Ancaster, Ontario.  Chris Reitsma, former MLBer, was the pitcher in that game, and as he was on the rubber he was the only player on the field not knocked to the ground.

[LouisB]

19 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

And to dispel the myth about local/ground rules not over-riding the rulebook - see Tropicana's rules about fly balls hitting the catwalk, and their eligibility to still be caught for an out.
 

Horrible example.  What OBR rule does that over-ride?  That's a ground rule. Each park/field has its own set of ground rules.  They pertain to the physical aspects of the park not playing rules.

As for you pulling your team off the field you can obviously do that for a number of reasons.  That doesn't change the fact that the umpire is the only person allowed to suspend play due to the weather/field conditions.

It's a moot point around here because every LL park/field has lightning detectors installed on them.  Alarm goes off clear the fields until the all clear sounds.

Florida is the lightning capitol of the US so we're are very cautious when it comes to lightning.