Defacing the Ball

[CoachCeetar]

All rules are technically logical nonsense.




I do have a quick inspection of every ball that comes back foul before I put it in my side bag and will also look at any that looks weird or I think has hit something that could change the ball. Also defaced by the ball being in play is very different to intentionally setting out to change what it a perfectly legal ball.

yes obviously, and a lot of rules are bad (softball, sports, otherwise) and should be questioned and changed. (Also this is not precisely laid out in the rulebook as it stands, precedent and case situations are not rules, they are interpretations of the judgement that could change at literally any moment. see: obstruction)

They're not really "changing" the ball. If this was a meaningful change, there would be rules about introducing new balls equally for each team. (like rules around when lights can be turned on) The home team has to use a fresh ball, but if they get three grounders the away team gets the ball that's rolled in the dirt a few times.

You are introducing and enforcing a penalty for something that's completely irrelevant to gameplay. I don't need the slippery slope arguments, if the ball has _Actually_ been defaced in a manner that is obsessive, unsafe, altering the dimensions of the ball, etc that's one thing, but it's a little dirt. It's almost definitely happening only because the pitcher just prefers the feel of the ball that way, the same way they pick out a glove, or batting grip, or clothes. Maybe they've convinced themselves the grip is better, but that's just superstition. They just like the feel of it, and it's NOT defaced by definition.

You do know that the word deface does have a definition, right? It means to spoil or damage the surface. In the context it is used in the rule that is exactly what it means, the player is spoiling or damaging the surface of the ball.

dirt is clearly not spoiling or damaging the surface of a baseball. That's obvious. Same way sticking a piece of gum to a sidewalk might be defacing it, but walking across it with muddy cleats is not.



Obviously this isn't always the case, but penalties are usually proportional to the perceived error/advantage. If you impede a runner, they get the base. If you throw the ball into the stands, the runners get roughly the bases they probably would've gotten if there were no stands. run out of the base path to avoid a tag? you're out, you would've been tagged. Hit it over the fence? that's probably about 4 bases.

Hit a pitch that the pitcher rolled in the dirt... unfair advantage, you win the pitch? no, that's dumb.

 

[marriard]

They're not really "changing" the ball. If this was a meaningful change, there would be rules about introducing new balls equally for each team. (like rules around when lights can be turned on) The home team has to use a fresh ball, but if they get three grounders the away team gets the ball that's rolled in the dirt a few times.

Clearly they are changing the ball. Otherwise why are they doing it.

And there are rules on introducing balls into play - at the end of the top half of the first inning, if you have not introduced a second ball into play (because of a foul or some other reason) you are to switch balls then.

You are introducing and enforcing a penalty for something that's completely irrelevant to gameplay. I don't need the slippery slope arguments, if the ball has _Actually_ been defaced in a manner that is obsessive, unsafe, altering the dimensions of the ball, etc that's one thing, but it's a little dirt. It's almost definitely happening only because the pitcher just prefers the feel of the ball that way, the same way they pick out a glove, or batting grip, or clothes. Maybe they've convinced themselves the grip is better, but that's just superstition. They just like the feel of it, and it's NOT defaced by definition.

Maybe we let them spit on it. That doesn't change much. It is just some spit? Or maybe some sandpaper? You know, just to add some grip they like. The rule broadly bans likely because it makes it easier to enforce. That is most rules.

Nowhere in the rules do we care about 'how the pitcher feels'. If she can't pitch a new ball, that is on her. It is going to happen.

Of course we need slippery slope arguments - because someone is always the a%% who tries to find the loophole. That is why 1/2 the rules exist (see infield fly, first touch for tag, running in lane to 1st, etc)

dirt is clearly not spoiling or damaging the surface of a baseball. That's obvious. Same way sticking a piece of gum to a sidewalk might be defacing it, but walking across it with muddy cleats is not.

The ball is changed.

Obviously this isn't always the case, but penalties are usually proportional to the perceived error/advantage. If you impede a runner, they get the base. If you throw the ball into the stands, the runners get roughly the bases they probably would've gotten if there were no stands. run out of the base path to avoid a tag? you're out, you would've been tagged. Hit it over the fence? that's probably about 4 bases.

Pretty easy. You know the rule, don't do this.

Hit a pitch that the pitcher rolled in the dirt... unfair advantage, you win the pitch? no, that's dumb.

As I said, they got the enforcement piece wrong. They never should have let the player pitch. It isn't a delayed dead ball. It was before the pirtch and the penalty should have been applied immediately.

 

[Carty]

Actually it does change the ball outside of allowing a better grip. The rough surface creates an air cushion around it and changes the wake, creating les drag on the ball. It allows it to move faster through the air. Which is why golf balls are dimpled.

 

[dogpatch]

Why can you not accept the fact that it is illegal?????? By the way, every ruleset I am aware of has rules about applying any substance directly to the ball.

You do know that the word deface does have a definition, right? It means to spoil or damage the surface. In the context it is used in the rule that is exactly what it means, the player is spoiling or damaging the surface of the ball. Your pitcher did something illegal and was called on it. Pretty simple, dont mess with the ball, it is a rule. She has probably gotten away with it many many times but finally ran into an umpire that knows and called the rule.

Why can you not accept the fact that it is illegal?????? By the way, every ruleset I am aware of has rules about applying any substance directly to the ball.

You do know that the word deface does have a definition, right? It means to spoil or damage the surface. In the context it is used in the rule that is exactly what it means, the player is spoiling or damaging the surface of the ball. Your pitcher did something illegal and was called on it. Pretty simple, dont mess with the ball, it is a rule. She has probably gotten away with it many many times but finally ran into an umpire that knows and called the rule.

Please review my original comments at the top of this thread. My point is that the NFHS SOFTBALL rules regarding this are vague, and the 2024 NFHS Rules Interpretation document discusses a rule without citation. It is without citation because there is no specific rule to cite.

Here's what I have learned from this discussion:
1- Rule 1-3-6 describes that defacing or changing the ball so it no longer meets the specs in Rule 1-3-3 is illegal. No penalty is specified.
2- Rule 10-2-3f instructs umpires to penalize for rules infractions (including defacing the ball). No penalty is specified.
3- Rule 6-2-2 prohibits the pitcher or other player from using non-approved or foreign substances on the ball. Penalty: Illegal pitch declared immediately with delayed dead ball signal, batter awarded a ball. It is specifically stated in this rule that dirt is NOT considered a foreign substance, so this rule does not apply.

Unless there is another rule buried somewhere in the rule book that prohibits a player from applying dirt to the ball while on the field of play, this action is NOT prohibited. Specific rules prohibiting this do exist in other sanctions, but we are not playing under non-NFHS softball rule sets.

 

[Comp]

Im done, you have the rule interpretation. It is illegal to put ANYTHING on the ball.

 

[cnardone]

Im done, you have the rule interpretation. It is illegal to put ANYTHING on the ball.

It is also illegal to remove anything!!! While this example if MLB, I think it falls under the same area of interest. Bruce Sutter used to rub one side of the ball on his Jersey. MLB forced him to stop doing that.

 

[CoachCeetar]

Im done, you have the rule interpretation. It is illegal to put ANYTHING on the ball.

rule interpretations ARE NOT RULES. They change that interpretation all the time.

You could call the ball changes if the catcher overthrows the pitcher, or underthrows the pitcher, and it rolls in the dirt. Third baseman drops it throwing it around the horn and gives it a little spin in the dirt picking it up. The pitcher could rub the ball on her dirt coated glove. softball actions shouldn't be considered defacing even if they are intentional. the ball touching dirt should not be considered defacing, and as we've stated multiple times, it's super not clear in the _rulebook_ that it is.

If you want to be an ump that takes a hard-line strict stance on this, then do so. ball touches the dirt, toss it. but you can't allow a pitch with a ball you've decided is not fit for play. The rules do not demand this stance though, and it seems an extremely silly one.

 

[dogpatch]

Im done, you have the rule interpretation. It is illegal to put ANYTHING on the ball.

Im done, you have the rule interpretation. It is illegal to put ANYTHING on the ball.

Assuming you are a high school umpire, you should discuss this amoung your fellow umpires. See what their thoughts are about interpreting and imposing rules during your games that are not found in the NFHS softball rule book. This may seem to be a trivial issue, but in this case, not only did the call change the outcome of an important conference game, but it put the losing team in jeopardy of not qualifying for state playoffs!

 

[marriard]

Assuming you are a high school umpire, you should discuss this amoung your fellow umpires. See what their thoughts are about interpreting and imposing rules during your games that are not found in the NFHS softball rule book. This may seem to be a trivial issue, but in this case, not only did the call change the outcome of an important conference game, but it put the losing team in jeopardy of not qualifying for state playoffs!

First there is 100% clear direction on this call. There is no discussion to be had other than how the rules committee has decided it is to be called. Not sure what you don't understand about that. Case books/scenarios are directives on how to interpret and call situations - they are not up for local OR personal feelings discussion. It is how it is to be called.

Second, as I stated above, while they recognized the rule break, they failed to apply the penalty immediately. You can't let the pitch happen - there is no reason for it. It isn't a delayed dead ball and they still have to pitch.

 

[CoachCeetar]

First there is 100% clear direction on this call. There is no discussion to be had other than how the rules committee has decided it is to be called. Not sure what you don't understand about that. Case books/scenarios are directives on how to interpret and call situations - they are not up for local OR personal feelings discussion. It is how it is to be called.

if only there were some way to codify that direction/decision into some sort of more firm edict.. hmm.

Until that's the case, it's 100% subjective at their whim. They could change it tonight if they wanted to. Hence, arguments that they should and that the interpretation is stupid are valid.