LLWS Sign Stealing

[jimurrayalterego]

I've tried parsing and rationalizing but I don't think I succeeded. I'm guessing LL parsed their own rule. "If, in the judgement of the umpire, this behavior is occurring, the team manager and those responsible including any player(s), coach(es) shall be warned after the first offense. Those responsible including any player(s), coach(es), and / or manager shall be ejected from the game for a team's subsequent offense." Player 1, the responsible person, was warned along with the manager. Player 2, the next responsible person, did not commit a subsequent offense to a prior one by himself. So no ejection for him. And the managers and coaches were not responsible. The sticking point to my rationalization is "a team's" but I'm guessing that's LL's story and they're sticking to it.

 

[ArchAngel72]

I was at the East round a while back when NH was playing Rhode Island  They had this exact thing happen under the old rule 

 

 

The old rule HAD no warning in it but they warned the team and let them play on. The Next season the rule was adjusted to what it is now and I read it and said to myself WTF.

The way its written they can give EACH and EVERY player on the team a warning before they toss someone.

 

Its awful. 

They need to do away with the damn rule all together and stop making umpires judge stupid things like this. These kids all idolize Major leaguers and when they see THEM doing it they will attempt the same and WE all know not ONE of those kids reads the rule book and none of them were told by their coaches DO NOT signal the batter from 2nd base.

Just snip the rule and deal with crying coaches cause then they cant have their pitcher bean that kid next time up.

 

[stevis]

Yep.  Be done with this rule.  This is part of baseball; your poor encryption does not make the other team unsporting. 

[Velho]

17 hours ago, jimurrayalterego said:

I've tried parsing and rationalizing but I don't think I succeeded. 

I'm with you. I don't see the wiggle room in the language.

 

4 hours ago, ArchAngel72 said:

The old rule HAD no warning in it but they warned the team and let them play on. The Next season the rule was adjusted to what it is now and I read it and said to myself WTF.

There were language additions in 2025 to add warnings (which is what most umpire did in practice anyway). I hadn't realized the change (never saw it noted along with jewelry, arm sleeves, etc):

(2025 adds underlined) "The stealing and relaying of signs to alert the batter of pitch selection and/or location is unsportsmanlike behavior. If, in the judgment of the umpire, this behavior is occurring, the team manager and those responsible including any player(s) and/or coach(es) shall be warned after the first offense. Those responsible including any player(s), coach(es), and/or manager shall be ejected from the game for a team’s subsequent offense.

 

Regarding the "it's part of the game position", I follow that and think it's an interesting discussion on how far that sentiment goes. "Sliding hard to break up the double play", beanballs, sticky stuff, etc. There is a sentiment that those are part of the game as well.

 

Back to LL, I imagine they are trying to avoid the drama that often comes with sign stealing (whether cravenly, earnestly, or somewhere in between). This specific case feels excessively craven. Like the rule or not, it's there. Should have been ejections on the second offense, ESPN and social media be damned.

 

[jimurrayalterego]

20 minutes ago, Velho said:

I'm with you. I don't see the wiggle room in the language.

 

There were language additions in 2025 to add warnings (which is what most umpire did in practice anyway). I hadn't realized the change (never saw it noted along with jewelry, arm sleeves, etc):

(2025 adds underlined) "The stealing and relaying of signs to alert the batter of pitch selection and/or location is unsportsmanlike behavior. If, in the judgment of the umpire, this behavior is occurring, the team manager and those responsible including any player(s) and/or coach(es) shall be warned after the first offense. Those responsible including any player(s), coach(es), and/or manager shall be ejected from the game for a team’s subsequent offense.

 

Regarding the "it's part of the game position", I follow that and think it's an interesting discussion on how far that sentiment goes. "Sliding hard to break up the double play", beanballs, sticky stuff, etc. There is a sentiment that those are part of the game as well.

 

Back to LL, I imagine they are trying to avoid the drama that often comes with sign stealing (whether cravenly, earnestly, or somewhere in between). This specific case feels excessively craven. Like the rule or not, it's there. Should have been ejections on the second offense, ESPN and social media be damned.

 

The 2025 Rim says you can eject right away without a warning. 

[Velho]

3 minutes ago, jimurrayalterego said:

The 2025 Rim says you can eject right away without a warning. 

As an Instructor Comment? Sure it's 2025? LL says they didn't do one (or you have a preview copy of 2026?).

Here is the 2024 RIM screenshot

[Richvee]

18 hours ago, jimurrayalterego said:

And the managers and coaches were not responsible.

I think this is the key for how this was handled/interpreted. When it mentions coaches, it doesn't say the coach is warned or ejected for the actions of the plyer. The coach himself would have to be accused of relaying the stolen signs. It's not like FED's illegal bat where the coach goes for the player's actions. 

[Velho]

10 minutes ago, Richvee said:

18 hours ago, jimurrayalterego said:

And the managers and coaches were not responsible.

I think this is the key for how this was handled/interpreted. When it mentions coaches, it doesn't say the coach is warned or ejected for the actions of the plyer. The coach himself would have to be accused of relaying the stolen signs. It's not like FED's illegal bat where the coach goes for the player's actions. 

Yeah.... ok. "Responsible" is open to interpretation.

imo, Manager is responsible for continued behaviors of the team after a warning. As well as coaching it in the first place since we can often tell from talking to the manager if it's the players doing it themselves vs being coached.

Regardless, the runner at a minimum would fall under the last sentence "Those responsible... shall be ejected from the game for a team’s subsequent offense."

Also, ejection only, not an out. There seems to be a sentiment across the interwebs that it was a game changer since the inning should have ended given 2 outs, and the next pitch HR wouldn't have happened.

[jimurrayalterego]

21 minutes ago, Velho said:

As an Instructor Comment? Sure it's 2025? LL says they didn't do one (or you have a preview copy of 2026?).

Here is the 2024 RIM screenshot

Sorry, it's in the 2025 "Make the Right Call" in the Rules App.

 

[Velho]

12 minutes ago, jimurrayalterego said:

Sorry, it's in the 2025 "Make the Right Call" in the Rules App.

Thanks. That publication hasn't been on my radar (or most anyone I talk to) but it did trigger my memory as where they identified how to handle the bat knob rule change. Have to add it to the toolbox.

Why they didn't update those in the RIM (or -gasp- the rulebook, I don't know). Little changes are ok imo. Doesn't have to be big bang only. It's a captive org so should be easier than other rulesets.

[Velho]

40 minutes ago, Velho said:

Here is the 2024 RIM screenshot

For completeness, here is the applicable 2025 "Make the Right Call" Situation identified by @jimurrayalterego

Also implicitly addresses the "responsible" aspect @Richvee focused in on.

[The Man in Blue]

It doesn't seem very vague to me.  It seems pretty clear.  I'm basing that on the items posted here as I do not call LL and don't have books for them.

The first offense was a TEAM warning and was CLEARLY issued.  Not sure what Jomboy is getting on about claiming it wasn't "an official warning, but this one is" and then saying "I don't know what they said."  If you don't know, don't say it. 

There is nothing in any of the verbiage posted that indicates each individual gets a warning.  In fact, it says quite the opposite.

The coach, the baserunner, and the batter (he is the one receiving and benefiting from the signals) should have all been ejected, IMO.  I have a broad sense of "responsible" when it comes to this crap.

I used to be glued to the TV for the Little League World Series, baseball, softball, all age levels . . . Crap like this is why I don't care anymore.  Too many instances of "well, we know this is the rule, but this is a BIG game . . . " (NCAA is headed down that same path).  Too many instances of celebrating poor behavior and excusing it because of "the stage" they are on.

STAND UP APPLAUSE for U2 for making the RIGHT call and then making the call AGAIN.  Shame on LL for ignoring their own rules and not backing it up with real consequence.

[ArchAngel72]

I know the rule was changed before the 2020 season as after the fiasco in Bristol the wording was changed basically to what it is today. I even put forth the argument about the way it was worded Every kid could do it and get a warning before ejecting anyone. As I was at the next springs class at Bristol. Even asked Doc about it.

 

I wont repeat what he told me but I get why they did not follow the rule.

 

They Do NOT want a kid being tossed from a game on ESPN

The damage you could do mentally to a 12 yr old by tossing him out of a LL game on TV and Youtube is extremely possible and  probable.

 

My 2 cents you do not want to toss a kid out on TV Take the rule OUT of the book

 

 

[BigBlue4u]

6 hours ago, Velho said:

Back to LL, I imagine they are trying to avoid the drama that often comes with sign stealing (whether cravenly, earnestly, or somewhere in between). This specific case feels excessively craven. Like the rule or not, it's there. Should have been ejections on the second offense, ESPN and social media be damned.

This is so stupid!   Catcher to pitcher: "Billy, we're flipping the signs.  From now on, one finger means curve and two fingers means fast ball!"  Geeze, I did that when I was a LL catcher a l-o-o-o-o-o-n-g time ago.

[The Man in Blue]

5 hours ago, ArchAngel72 said:

They Do NOT want a kid being tossed from a game on ESPN

The damage you could do mentally to a 12 yr old by tossing him out of a LL game on TV and Youtube is extremely possible and  probable.

My 2 cents you do not want to toss a kid out on TV Take the rule OUT of the book

 

Having that "home run" called a foul ball may damage him also, so we are going to go ahead and call it fair. I know that pitch bounced, but he really wanted a strike out, so we'll give it to him.

We've had this argument here many times in many forms . . . when you start picking and choosing which rules you are going to enforce and when . . . 

Did the bat flip lawsuit get discussed on here? 

[grayhawk]

Off-topic, but I'm getting bored watching every PU do the same exact thing. Hands on knees and hammer strikes. I know it's been said that these are not requirements, but I'm having a hard time believing it. We're not softball umpires! I'd like to see more individuality. Sigh...

[SeeingEyeDog]

@Velho, that rule you posted reads, "...a runner ON 2B." It doesn't say near or in the vicinity of or around...it absolutely says ON. I know leading-off is not permitted at this level but, if R2 can stand with both feet off the bag, steal the sign, relay the sign and THEN get back ON the bag, is that legal?

Asking for all the pedantic coaches...

~Dawg

[jimurrayalterego]

20 minutes ago, SeeingEyeDog said:

@Velho, that rule you posted reads, "...a runner ON 2B." It doesn't say near or in the vicinity of or around...it absolutely says ON. I know leading-off is not permitted at this level but, if R2 can stand with both feet off the bag, steal the sign, relay the sign and THEN get back ON the bag, is that legal?

Asking for all the pedantic coaches...

~Dawg

That was a caseplay for the rule referenced. It's not in the rulebook. The rule is pretty simple, except it's not, but your OP has no legs. 

For a coach to be pedantic he would have to have rules knowledge. I only know of two, @Coach Carl and @beerguy55. They might some more pedantic coaches but most are not pedantic they are argumentative.

[JonnyCat]

26 minutes ago, grayhawk said:

I know it's been said that these are not requirements, but I'm having a hard time believing it.

It is in fact a requirement now. Stu Hartenstein, the new LL Director of Umpire Development (DUD), has mandated the hammer, as well as a number of other goofy mechanics that plainly suck. That's the new trend in LL, and they tell you this in the ID camps. You are to do it their way, or forget about Regional or WS assignments.

[SeeingEyeDog]

17 minutes ago, jimurrayalterego said:

That was a caseplay for the rule referenced. It's not in the rulebook. The rule is pretty simple, except it's not, but your OP has no legs. 

For a coach to be pedantic he would have to have rules knowledge. I only know of two, @Coach Carl and @beerguy55. They might some more pedantic coaches but most are not pedantic they are argumentative.

My apologies...I was being glib, of course...

And by pedantic coaches I meant..."pedantic coaches" in quotations. None of them are pedantic. They are...as you said, argumentative from a perspective of ANY narrative to their team's advantage, of course whether the rules support that narrative or not.

~Dawg

[grayhawk]

18 minutes ago, JonnyCat said:

It is in fact a requirement now. Stu Hartenstein, the new LL Director of Umpire Development (DUD), has mandated the hammer, as well as a number of other goofy mechanics that plainly suck. That's the new trend in LL, and they tell you this in the ID camps. You are to do it their way, or forget about Regional or WS assignments.

Well, they're the ones writing the checks. Oh wait...

[JonnyCat]

12 minutes ago, grayhawk said:

Well, they're the ones writing the checks. Oh wait...

With all the new requirements, it really does seem like a job now, or at least a job interview during training like Pro School. Except they don't pay you. In the last couple of years, I've been starting to feel taken advantage of by LL. 

Oh yeah, it's for the children.

[elares]

It's almost as if there is an unwritten rule for LL on TV.    No matter how obvious the participant action is a violation of the rulebook, no ejections unless pre-approved by Williamsport.

 

 

[Velho]

1 hour ago, SeeingEyeDog said:

@Velho, that rule you posted reads, "...a runner ON 2B." It doesn't say near or in the vicinity of or around...it absolutely says ON. I know leading-off is not permitted at this level but, if R2 can stand with both feet off the bag, steal the sign, relay the sign and THEN get back ON the bag, is that legal?

Pedantically, runners have to be in contact with the base at TOP. It's closed bases but a different rule than softball (it's not a look back rule).

But it's not needed. R2 can see if from the bag (at worse leaning out to the right but still in contact with the bag).

[Velho]

59 minutes ago, JonnyCat said:

It is in fact a requirement now. Stu Hartenstein, the new LL Director of Umpire Development (DUD), has mandated the hammer, as well as a number of other goofy mechanics that plainly suck. That's the new trend in LL, and they tell you this in the ID camps. You are to do it their way, or forget about Regional or WS assignments.

Or fake it well enough during ID camps (apparently) 😉.  I say that because I've seen none standard mechanics her and there during regions. A pointer or side ripsaw 3K call for example - though both reverted back quickly thereafter. I did see a unique twisting hammer that was used all game. During Intermediate WS semifinal game I even saw a guy doing scissors (watched that one live).