Tough decision...what would you have done?

[default]

If this was a safety issue, you would only allow pitchers to pitch that wore a mask. This is a civil rights issue since you only require handicapped players to wear a mask.


Coach Dennis: A player has the right to wear required medical equipment such as a brace or a medic-alert bracelet and no umpire in his right mind would force a player to remove it. Hopefully the umpire did not insist on removing the chest protector.

At first he did ask for her to take it off saying it was a distraction when she was batting but after discussion he allowed her to play.

 

[default]

Interesting thread and discussion. And a good example of the kinds of decisions that umpires are forced to make "on the spot" in any number of games, where there is no clear cut rule to address the issue and no matter what you decide- no matter how well-intentioned- somebody isn't going to like it.

First off, I will disagree with anyone saying that the umpires "overstepped their authority". Actually, they acted within their authority. Rule 10 (you know, the rule that nobody ever bothers to read, because it covers the umpire's duties ) empowers the umpires to make decisions on any point not specifically covered in the rule book. Issues with player safety would fall under that jurisdiction.

Having said that...my personal opinion leans toward letting her pitch. Having the right to do something (prevent her from pitching) doesn't always mean it is the right thing to do. Generally, umpires are not responsible for evaluating the skills of the players or their ability to protect themselves from every possible injury. That responsibility lies with their coaches and parents.

You can "what if" these scenarios to death and second guess any decision. What if...the player got moved to the outfield...then got nailed by a fly ball because her glovework was weak? What if...she was batting and, due to an inability to grip the bat properly, she lost it on a swing and it hit another player? What if...she was allowed to pitch, but because of the "glove switching" was not able to meet all of the pitching requirements that any other player is held to (bringing the hands together to start the pitch, no "double touches", etc).

But all of that is impossible to predict. Just as a certain injury at the pitching position would be impossible to predict. If her parents are comfortable with her pitching, and her coach is comfortable with it, as the umpire I lean toward letting her pitch.

 

[default]

Interesting thread and discussion. And a good example of the kinds of decisions that umpires are forced to make "on the spot" in any number of games, where there is no clear cut rule to address the issue and no matter what you decide- no matter how well-intentioned- somebody isn't going to like it.

First off, I will disagree with anyone saying that the umpires "overstepped their authority". Actually, they acted within their authority. Rule 10 (you know, the rule that nobody ever bothers to read, because it covers the umpire's duties ) empowers the umpires to make decisions on any point not specifically covered in the rule book. Issues with player safety would fall under that jurisdiction.

Having said that...my personal opinion leans toward letting her pitch. Having the right to do something (prevent her from pitching) doesn't always mean it is the right thing to do. Generally, umpires are not responsible for evaluating the skills of the players or their ability to protect themselves from every possible injury. That responsibility lies with their coaches and parents.

You can "what if" these scenarios to death and second guess any decision. What if...the player got moved to the outfield...then got nailed by a fly ball because her glovework was weak? What if...she was batting and, due to an inability to grip the bat properly, she lost it on a swing and it hit another player? What if...she was allowed to pitch, but because of the "glove switching" was not able to meet all of the pitching requirements that any other player is held to (bringing the hands together to start the pitch, no "double touches", etc).

But all of that is impossible to predict. Just as a certain injury at the pitching position would be impossible to predict. If her parents are comfortable with her pitching, and her coach is comfortable with it, as the umpire I lean toward letting her pitch.

If you are saying the umpire had a right to do what he did, then this discussion is over. He made the right call. No discrimination, not anything like that. If he was in the right to make the girl not pitch, then there is nothing to discuss.

 

[default]

Bretman says that the umpire can invoke the dreaded Rule 10. Which is most commonly used when the umpire has got nothing else to hang his hat on. He goes onto to say that an umpire shouldn't be judging of the skill of the player or appropriateness of a coaches decision. He finishes up by saying that all he would likely allow her to pitch.

The umpire made a call and the game continued but the discussion is far from over. The umire clearly discriminated against this particular player and against all handicapped players. That he did it with the best of intentions with what he thought was in the best interests of the player and in the best interests of the game does not mitigate his act of discrimination.

This girl has enough of an uphill battle dealing with life with only one functioning arm to allow an umpire to impose additional burdens on her during a rec softball game. Unlike every other kid on the mound she has to prove competency before she is allowed to pitch. Of course she went to the outfield and of course her mother didn't cause any fuss, this is the kind of thing that they deal with everyday from insensitive people. They have to pick their fights and this wasn't one that they could win without paying a stiff price.

Some of you will remember that girls were not allowed to play full court basketball because they were to frail, or that they could become nurses but not doctors because they couldn't take the stress. These limitations were imposed by others with the best of intentions, for great reasons and were commonly accepted. Some brave soul decided to buck conventional wisdom and found that girls cold play full court basketball and become excellent doctors.

Instead of blocking this player we would be far better off to allow her to try and see what she can do. Maybe she is Jim Abbot with braids maybe not. Let her play.

 

[default]

Not all discrimination is wrongful or illegal.

 

[default]

Too many people are worrying about "What the rules say" instead of what common sense says. I see that as lazy or an excuse not to think/reason.

Anyone who has been around this game for any amount of time has seen kids, without disabilities, get injured. Sometimes these are minor scrapes and bruises and other times they are life altering. At a certain point common sense has to take over here. People keep throwing out Jim Abbott and I guess that is somewhat of a fair analogy. although I think we need to remember that baseball and softball are not the same game, and I would contend that there is a much higher risk of injury in softball than in BB. Now add to that the "win at all costs" attitude that seems to be proliferating and we have a recipe for disaster.

I commend "On the Bucket" for actually taking a rational & reasoned approach to the situation. Not to sound like an elitist, but I would not expect the average rec coach or parent to have the best perspective on the potential hazards that this young lady was facing.

Now don't get me wrong, I do not what to see anyone held down by what would be perceived as a disability. I love all those feel good stories of people's triumph over their disability. The fact that this young lady was endeavoring to pitch was the beginning of one of those stories, but the fact that she was not yet prepared (unable to glove-up quickly) to be in that position cannot be ignored.

She requires more practice at that move or some equipment modification to enable her to achieve her ultimate goal. In the interim it should be explained to her parents/coach that she will be allowed to pitch only if wearing a mask and heart guard. Establish a regular schedule of re-evaluation to allow her to continue to progress to being gear free.

After all this is supposed to be an environment to help the kids develop, treat is as such and stop worrying about "The Rules". Worry about the next 70 or 80 years of this young ladies life, that is what truly matters. JMHO

 

[default]

This has been an interesting debate for sure. While my opinion from the beginning has been that the girl should have been allowed to continue pitching, I can't blame in the slightest the umpire for placing a priority on the safety of the child, especially on the spur of the moment like that. I think this is especially important if the umpire felt that the girl, parent or coach migh be "ignorant" as to the potential danger of the situation.

In reflecting back now (much easier to do!), I think I might have called time, talked privately with the coach to inquire as to whether they were aware of the potential danger, whether the girl had ever pitched before, and if a mask was available. At that point, I think the umpire has done his job and if everyone chooses to play on as is, then let the game continue.

Just think about how terrible you would feel if red lights were going off in your head about the danger of the situation, you neglected to say or do anything about it, and then a child was seriously injured. That might just stick with you for the rest of your life.

 

[default]

Bretman says that the umpire can invoke the dreaded Rule 10. Which is most commonly used when the umpire has got nothing else to hang his hat on. He goes onto to say that an umpire shouldn't be judging of the skill of the player or appropriateness of a coaches decision. He finishes up by saying that all he would likely allow her to pitch.

The umpire made a call and the game continued but the discussion is far from over. The umire clearly discriminated against this particular player and against all handicapped players. That he did it with the best of intentions with what he thought was in the best interests of the player and in the best interests of the game does not mitigate his act of discrimination.

This girl has enough of an uphill battle dealing with life with only one functioning arm to allow an umpire to impose additional burdens on her during a rec softball game. Unlike every other kid on the mound she has to prove competency before she is allowed to pitch. Of course she went to the outfield and of course her mother didn't cause any fuss, this is the kind of thing that they deal with everyday from insensitive people. They have to pick their fights and this wasn't one that they could win without paying a stiff price.

Some of you will remember that girls were not allowed to play full court basketball because they were to frail, or that they could become nurses but not doctors because they couldn't take the stress. These limitations were imposed by others with the best of intentions, for great reasons and were commonly accepted. Some brave soul decided to buck conventional wisdom and found that girls cold play full court basketball and become excellent doctors.

Instead of blocking this player we would be far better off to allow her to try and see what she can do. Maybe she is Jim Abbot with braids maybe not. Let her play.

Absolutely right on!!

 

[default]

Too many people are worrying about "What the rules say" instead of what common sense says. I see that as lazy or an excuse not to think/reason.

Anyone who has been around this game for any amount of time has seen kids, without disabilities, get injured. Sometimes these are minor scrapes and bruises and other times they are life altering. At a certain point common sense has to take over here. People keep throwing out Jim Abbott and I guess that is somewhat of a fair analogy. although I think we need to remember that baseball and softball are not the same game, and I would contend that there is a much higher risk of injury in softball than in BB. Now add to that the "win at all costs" attitude that seems to be proliferating and we have a recipe for disaster.

I commend "On the Bucket" for actually taking a rational & reasoned approach to the situation. Not to sound like an elitist, but I would not expect the average rec coach or parent to have the best perspective on the potential hazards that this young lady was facing.

Now don't get me wrong, I do not what to see anyone held down by what would be perceived as a disability. I love all those feel good stories of people's triumph over their disability. The fact that this young lady was endeavoring to pitch was the beginning of one of those stories, but the fact that she was not yet prepared (unable to glove-up quickly) to be in that position cannot be ignored.

She requires more practice at that move or some equipment modification to enable her to achieve her ultimate goal. In the interim it should be explained to her parents/coach that she will be allowed to pitch only if wearing a mask and heart guard. Establish a regular schedule of re-evaluation to allow her to continue to progress to being gear free.

After all this is supposed to be an environment to help the kids develop, treat is as such and stop worrying about "The Rules". Worry about the next 70 or 80 years of this young ladies life, that is what truly matters. JMHO

I guess your quote at the bottom of your post means as long as that kid does not have any form of disabilities.

Once again as a parent of a disabled child there is not a second that goes by in the day that you are not evaluating risk with everything they do. Even the simplest activity, depending on the extent of the disability can be life threatening, so for you to think for one second that you or anyone else would be more concerned or be able to evaluate the risk more throoughly is condescending and short sighted.

 

[default]

Not all discrimination is wrongful or illegal.

Really?...........could you point out a few situations where discrimination is not at the very least wrong.

 

[default]

interesting thread and discussion. And a good example of the kinds of decisions that umpires are forced to make "on the spot" in any number of games, where there is no clear cut rule to address the issue and no matter what you decide- no matter how well-intentioned- somebody isn't going to like it.

First off, i will disagree with anyone saying that the umpires "overstepped their authority". Actually, they acted within their authority. Rule 10 (you know, the rule that nobody ever bothers to read, because it covers the umpire's duties ) empowers the umpires to make decisions on any point not specifically covered in the rule book. Issues with player safety would fall under that jurisdiction.

Having said that...my personal opinion leans toward letting her pitch. Having the right to do something (prevent her from pitching) doesn't always mean it is the right thing to do. Generally, umpires are not responsible for evaluating the skills of the players or their ability to protect themselves from every possible injury. That responsibility lies with their coaches and parents.

You can "what if" these scenarios to death and second guess any decision. What if...the player got moved to the outfield...then got nailed by a fly ball because her glovework was weak? What if...she was batting and, due to an inability to grip the bat properly, she lost it on a swing and it hit another player? What if...she was allowed to pitch, but because of the "glove switching" was not able to meet all of the pitching requirements that any other player is held to (bringing the hands together to start the pitch, no "double touches", etc).

But all of that is impossible to predict. Just as a certain injury at the pitching position would be impossible to predict. If her parents are comfortable with her pitching, and her coach is comfortable with it, as the umpire i lean toward letting her pitch.

+1

bretman says that the umpire can invoke the dreaded rule 10. Which is most commonly used when the umpire has got nothing else to hang his hat on. He goes onto to say that an umpire shouldn't be judging of the skill of the player or appropriateness of a coaches decision. He finishes up by saying that all he would likely allow her to pitch.

The umpire made a call and the game continued but the discussion is far from over. The umire clearly discriminated against this particular player and against all handicapped players. That he did it with the best of intentions with what he thought was in the best interests of the player and in the best interests of the game does not mitigate his act of discrimination.

This girl has enough of an uphill battle dealing with life with only one functioning arm to allow an umpire to impose additional burdens on her during a rec softball game. Unlike every other kid on the mound she has to prove competency before she is allowed to pitch. Of course she went to the outfield and of course her mother didn't cause any fuss, this is the kind of thing that they deal with everyday from insensitive people. They have to pick their fights and this wasn't one that they could win without paying a stiff price.

Some of you will remember that girls were not allowed to play full court basketball because they were to frail, or that they could become nurses but not doctors because they couldn't take the stress. These limitations were imposed by others with the best of intentions, for great reasons and were commonly accepted. Some brave soul decided to buck conventional wisdom and found that girls cold play full court basketball and become excellent doctors.

Instead of blocking this player we would be far better off to allow her to try and see what she can do. Maybe she is jim abbot with braids maybe not. Let her play.

+1

 

[default]

Too many people are worrying about "What the rules say" instead of what common sense says. I see that as lazy or an excuse not to think/reason.

Anyone who has been around this game for any amount of time has seen kids, without disabilities, get injured. Sometimes these are minor scrapes and bruises and other times they are life altering. At a certain point common sense has to take over here. People keep throwing out Jim Abbott and I guess that is somewhat of a fair analogy. although I think we need to remember that baseball and softball are not the same game, and I would contend that there is a much higher risk of injury in softball than in BB. Now add to that the "win at all costs" attitude that seems to be proliferating and we have a recipe for disaster.

I commend "On the Bucket" for actually taking a rational & reasoned approach to the situation. Not to sound like an elitist, but I would not expect the average rec coach or parent to have the best perspective on the potential hazards that this young lady was facing.

Now don't get me wrong, I do not what to see anyone held down by what would be perceived as a disability. I love all those feel good stories of people's triumph over their disability. The fact that this young lady was endeavoring to pitch was the beginning of one of those stories, but the fact that she was not yet prepared (unable to glove-up quickly) to be in that position cannot be ignored.

She requires more practice at that move or some equipment modification to enable her to achieve her ultimate goal. In the interim it should be explained to her parents/coach that she will be allowed to pitch only if wearing a mask and heart guard. Establish a regular schedule of re-evaluation to allow her to continue to progress to being gear free.

After all this is supposed to be an environment to help the kids develop, treat is as such and stop worrying about "The Rules". Worry about the next 70 or 80 years of this young ladies life, that is what truly matters. JMHO

This doesn't fall under the win at all costs or something that you can just "common sense" says. Most have never been in this position nor do we have common knowledge of the outcome to letting her pitch.

Under your evaluation scenario, whose doing the evaluation? Her coach? The first ump that let her pitch? Her mom? The league that already said let her pitch? Or the 1 guy that has a problem with her pitching?

 

[default]

I guess your quote at the bottom of your post means as long as that kid does not have any form of disabilities.

Once again as a parent of a disabled child there is not a second that goes by in the day that you are not evaluating risk with everything they do. Even the simplest activity, depending on the extent of the disability can be life threatening, so for you to think for one second that you or anyone else would be more concerned or be able to evaluate the risk more thoroughly is condescending and short sighted.

I apologize if my comment came off that way. My intent was not to offend, but simply to make the point that one can only evaluate the risk to the point that they know it exists. I hope that make sense, it does in my head.

We cannot expect a parent or coach that does not recognize the very real risks or magnitude of potential injury to make an informed decision. This isn't a slight on either of them, this is just something that experience with the sport provides. This is where there needs to be someone who steps in and ensures that these risks are fully understood. In my mind I equate it to my dd first exposure to travel when she was 9, I was in awe of the huge amount of talent that was out there. She was a stud in local rec ball, but now she was just another good player. It took her time to raise her skill level and to this day I worry when she takes the mound as a college freshman.

 

[default]

Consider this: A 14u coach, well know here and always in the top ten had a girl up at the plate. Opposing team had third playing way in anticipating a bunt. Swing away was on, girl at plate was not going to bunt. This coach stopped play and went to the opposing coach and told him he promised they would not bunt please move your girl back. He thought she was so close she would have been hurt with a line drive at her. To close to react. We have all seen this situation, third to close if the hitter hits away.

ONTHEBUCKET..what will you or have you done in this situation??? What would your concern about third's safety be?? Would you or have you made her move back??

There are several high risk for injury situations in fastpitch. Can we only be concerned enough to react to the disabled player without it being discrimination?

A girl can play too close to the plate and be just as vulnerable if not more than a one armed pitcher.

 

[default]

Really?...........could you point out a few situations where discrimination is not at the very least wrong.

I will be happy to step in and do that.

1. When I look for someone to date (rare these days), I discriminate against men. I look only for women. This is pure discrimination.

2. When I look for players, I look for those who are gifted athletically. I discriminate against those who aren't. In addition, I take only girls with really good grades, discriminating against those who don't have good grades.

3. When I walk down the street, if I see several male teenagers wearning pants down to their ankles and big coats coming my way, I'm probably crossing the street. If I see several well-dressed men or women, I give it no thought. Again, discrimination.

4. We discriminate based on age. We're not typically going to allow a 10-year-old to play 16-U travel ball. Are we discriminating unfairly against the 10-year-old? After all, who are we to say it's unsafe if we're not permitted to use our judgment to discriminate?

Unfortunately, the word discrimination has come to always have a negative connotation because of its use in civil rights legislation. Discrimination is absolutely necessary in a society or else we would practically cease to function. Illegal or immoral discrimination (not always one and the same) is a different story.

 

[default]

Interesting thread and discussion. And a good example of the kinds of decisions that umpires are forced to make "on the spot" in any number of games, where there is no clear cut rule to address the issue and no matter what you decide- no matter how well-intentioned- somebody isn't going to like it.

First off, i will disagree with anyone saying that the umpires "overstepped their authority". Actually, they acted within their authority. Rule 10 (you know, the rule that nobody ever bothers to read, because it covers the umpire's duties ) empowers the umpires to make decisions on any point not specifically covered in the rule book. Issues with player safety would fall under that jurisdiction.

I didn't realize that this would follow under rule 10 because there isn't a specific rule saying it is legal for a player to pitch if she only has use of 1 hand. Silly me, I never knew.
I guess, even if there was a specific rule saying ?that it is legal for a player to pitch if she only has use of 1 hand? the umpire could invoke rule 10, saying she not allowed be he feels it is unsafe. So either way it doesn't matter. We need to let this young lady know it is not up to her if she pitches, it is up to each individual umpire.

 

[default]

I will be happy to step in and do that.

1. When I look for someone to date (rare these days), I discriminate against men. I look only for women. This is pure discrimination.

2. When I look for players, I look for those who are gifted athletically. I discriminate against those who aren't. In addition, I take only girls with really good grades, discriminating against those who don't have good grades.

3. When I walk down the street, if I see several male teenagers wearning pants down to their ankles and big coats coming my way, I'm probably crossing the street. If I see several well-dressed men or women, I give it no thought. Again, discrimination.

4. We discriminate based on age. We're not typically going to allow a 10-year-old to play 16-U travel ball. Are we discriminating unfairly against the 10-year-old? After all, who are we to say it's unsafe if we're not permitted to use our judgment to discriminate?

Unfortunately, the word discrimination has come to always have a negative connotation because of its use in civil rights legislation. Discrimination is absolutely necessary in a society or else we would practically cease to function. Illegal or immoral discrimination (not always one and the same) is a different story.

Joe,

Your points are well taken

I would only suggest that the definition of discrimination taken out of the context of this discussion would be unfair treatment of a person on the basis of prejudice which caused some level of harm.

I would also say that most of your examples cause no harm or negetive effect on the other party. (Althogh I am sure that a few men out there feel harmed not to be given the opportunity to date

 

[default]

Is it really unfair treatment based on prejudice when the umpire waited until he saw how long the pitcher took to put her glove on her hand?

 

[default]

Joe,

Your points are well taken

I would only suggest that the definition of discrimination taken out of the context of this discussion would be unfair treatment of a person on the basis of prejudice which caused some level of harm.

I would also say that most of your examples cause no harm or negetive effect on the other party. (Althogh I am sure that a few men out there feel harmed not to be given the opportunity to date

LOL>.... good one Mr. Spirit!!!!!!

 

[default]

Is it really unfair treatment based on prejudice when the umpire waited until he saw how long the pitcher took to put her glove on her hand?

Yes if the same umpire will let the girl with two arms play so close to the plate that she can't react in time to protect yourself with two arms if a hitter swings away instead of bunting. If the same ump will let a mask-less pitcher whose mechanics have her ending in an a position where she is vulnerable. Yes if the same ump will let a very heavy mask-less girl with slow reflexes pitch.

The association told him he was wrong to stop her. The most respected umpire in Ohio and here on OFC said he wouldn't have done it. Doesn't take away from the fact that it was PROBABLY stupid for her parents and coach to let her go without a mask but it wasn't the ump's call.