Ejection!!

[default]

Ok, one of our Senior OF was ejected from the HS game today in the 1st inning...

Apparently (as they should) the umpire asked if the teams were properly equipped and removed all jewelry "prior" to the game and well before the start of the contest....
Our batter stepped up to the plate in the 1st inning with one of those wrist band type rubber things on and the umpire called time and ejected the player.

I know ultimately this falls back on the head coach for not following through with game instructions and making sure all players were in compliance but does the ejection mean she will have to sit a game?

 

[default]

i vote the ump is an ____ MD

 

[default]

She was ejected for wearing one of these???

I completely agree with MD, the ump is an a$$. I believe the idea behind not wearing the jewelry is to prevent injury. What possible injury could one of these cause? Heck, if she was wearing several of them, she could make the argument that they were actually protecting her wrist.

What a jerk. (sorry I couldn't answer your original question, though)

 

[default]

if it was the ones from above then they should be fine. the worst that could happen is they snap off. had the same issue with a track runner a few years ago. she ended up being allowed to wear it and the official apologized

 

[default]

i vote the ump is an ____ MD

He's got my vote as well

 

[default]

Don't agree with the ejection but here are the OHSAA Rules.....

11.1) Players
Any player ejected or disqualified for unsporting conduct or flagrant foul shall be ineligible for all contests for the remainder of that day. In addition, the player shall be ineligible for all contests at all levels in that sport until two regular season/tournament contests (one in football) are played at the same level as the ejection or disqualification. When ejection or disqualification of a player results from illegal substitution in baseball, softball or basketball, the two contest suspension does not apply.​

 

[default]

does "tool" cover it?

 

[default]

umps name should be publically stated as to avoid him getting the pleasure of costing some kid a game or games . We all need to be on the lookout for Blue like that. very sad.

 

[default]

Hope this umpire has a day job....

 

[default]

Don't agree with the ejection but here are the OHSAA Rules.....

11.1) Players
Any player ejected or disqualified for unsporting conduct or flagrant foul shall be ineligible for all contests for the remainder of that day. In addition, the player shall be ineligible for all contests at all levels in that sport until two regular season/tournament contests (one in football) are played at the same level as the ejection or disqualification. When ejection or disqualification of a player results from illegal substitution in baseball, softball or basketball, the two contest suspension does not apply.​

I would strongly argue that being ejected for wearing jewelry (and yes, I agree that those rubber things hardly qualify as jewelry) is not an ejection for "unsporting conduct" and that there should be no two game suspension. The jewelry thing to me is more analogous to an illegal substitution than to unsporting conduct/flagrant foul.

I would have to review the OSHAA Code to see whether "unsporting conduct" is a defined term.

 

[default]

That would not be a flagrant foul so they would only have to sit that game.

 

[default]

This is from the rules interpreters bulletin dated 4-3-2011 from Jerry Fick
Director of Officials Development

"Jewelry & "Phiten" Necklaces:
The so-called energy-enhancing bracelets and necklaces are NOT legal in high school softball. A commonly advertised item is marketed as a "Phiten" necklace or bracelet and often worn by professional athletes. It is not legal.
Other items such as the "Livestrong" bracelet, WWJD bracelets, etc. are also NOT legal. "

Now on the other hand (no pun intended) the penalty is a warning for the initial incident, then restriction to the dugout for the coach for additional infractions.

 

[default]

Thanks ump for the information. I hope that the blues are explaining this recent expansion of "jewelry" to include the rubber bracelets during pregame.

And it's too bad that the blue who ejected the young lady didn't understand the appropriate penalty.

 

[default]

I got a couple of problems with this one. One is the umpire's call and the other is with some of the responses!

Yes, those rubber bracelets have been deemed illegal. Coaches should know this. They have a rule book and this was covered at the mandatory state meetings that coaches are required to attend. From the coaches standpoint...ignorance is no excuse. It's not always the coach's fault though. Kids can slip these things on without the coach realizing it, even if he's already told them not to.

Umpires don't really have any say in determining if a piece of jewelry or decorative item is legal or not. We have been told these are illegal and we are bound to enforce that rule, whether we agree with it or not.

But...and here is the BIG but...this umpire did not enforce the rule properly! Yes, we are required to ask the coach before the game if his players are properly equipped and are not to begin the game until both coaches have answered in the affirmative.

Once the game begins, if a player is wearing jewelry, the proper procedure laid out in the rule book is to:

- Correct the problem (have it removed).

- Issue a team warning.

- If the offense is repeated, restrict the offending player and the head coach to the bench for the remainder of the game.

No, the pre-game question about players being properly equipped is NOT to be considered as the official team warning. That can't be issued until the game has started and the rule is actually broken. And, most importantly, violating this rule is NOT to be punished by an ejection! Restriction to the bench carries no additional suspension of games, as does an ejection.

If I was this kid's coach or A.D. I would follow this one up the "chain of command" and fight tooth and nail to have the suspension reversed.

 

[default]

Of course Bretman is right ... those bracelets have always been illegal in high school softball as far back as I can remember. Surprised so many posters here did not know. Not saying I agree with it ... just that it's always been the case. The issue is that the team should have received a warning before anyone is restricted to the bench. Does the poster know for a fact that the player was actually "ejected" vs. restricted to bench? Someone else may have called it ejected, but did the ump actually use that word? Poster definitely didn't say couldn't play next game ... just was asking if could or not.

 

[default]

One of our summer girls had enough earings in to start a Jewelry store.... Mid Game had to take them out..... was too funny....

 

[default]

First and foremost - rules are rules. Umpires, coaches and parents personally deciding on a case-by-case basis about a situation like this is a slippery slope. There was a reason a rules committee instituted a rule like this, and it probably took a LOT of reasoning and discussion.

At first glance, my thoughts are "what harm could a little rubber bracelet do?" Regardless of my OPINION, that's NOT my question to ask. Likewise, if your DD has a waist-length ponytail, she can't request to bind it up with a metal hair clasp just while she's pitching.

If a kid violates a rule, it may not be the coaches fault, but the coach is STILL RESPONSIBLE.

It's funny watching a college game after enduring the "jewelry rules" from younger years. The earrings, chains, bracelets - you name it. They have rules too, but considerably relaxed.

Rather than complaining to an umpire about enforcing the rules (doing their job), I would suggest petitioning the rules committee that makes these rules to change them.

 

[default]

This athlete should have been told to take the bracelet off, then she should have batted...how big of an ego do some of these guys have? Wow!

 

[default]

I hate to see an umpire's ego spill over and affect the game, but I don't necessarily see misapplying a rule as an ego issue.

Umpires are supposed to address this- it is part of their responsibility. The only problem is that this was addressed the wrong way, with respect to how the rule is written.

 

[default]

I'm not an umpire but it's a little scary to me how everyone has jumped all over the umpire on this one ... calling him names, asking him to be publicly named here, etc. This rule has been around forever ... both the coach and a senior player should have known the rule by now, though I acknowledge that it is easy to forget about one of these bracelets. Now if in fact there was no warning, then the umpire was absolutely wrong to restrict the player to the bench but then if the coach knew the rules, he or she should have also known that they should have only received a warning.