Player Conferences

[The Man In Blue]

Interesting discussion. Let me offer this little tidbit when it comes to NFHS. Per rule 2-14-1, a charged conference is "when the coach or dugout/bench personnel requests and is granted a time-out to meet with offensive or defensive personnel."

That is the definition not a rule. If it only existed in its own little bubble, I would tend to agree with you. Since it does not, and there is an entire section of rules (posted earlier) in the NFHS book that deals with charged conferences, I am inclined to disagree and point out that it is one of many contradictions that exist in the book.

I'm not saying the definition is meaningless ... I'm saying it does not hold as tightly as a rule which prescribes or denies action and has consequence.

 

[The Man In Blue]

But when F2 requested and was granted Time to talk to F1, there is nothing wrong with the opposing coach talking to their players. Why hold the offense accountable for the delay when they weren't the ones who initiated it, the defense did. The same is true when the plate umpire initiates a delay to take a substitution from one team, writes it in their lineup card, goes to the other team and informs them of the substitution, then announces the substitution to the official scorer.

See the rules posted earlier. According to the rules, the only "free" one in this situation is when the opposing team is being charged a conference. Initiation has nothing to do with the rule. If two fielders meet, that is not a charged conference, ergo the offensive coach doesn't get a free one.

 

[CHSUmp97]

See the rules posted earlier. According to the rules, the only "free" one in this situation is when the opposing team is being charged a conference. Initiation has nothing to do with the rule. If two fielders meet, that is not a charged conference, ergo the offensive coach doesn't get a free one.

Well, we have asked NFHS to come out with an interpretation of this to settle the argument. I hope they do so soon. In the meantime, we'll just have to continue to agree to disagree because it's obvious to me I won't convince you otherwise. And I'm going to continue to allow the base coach to meet with the batter and runners when there's a defensive player-only conference because there is no rule saying that when play is suspended by the defense, the offense cannot have a coach-to-player discussion.

 

[The Man In Blue]

@CHSUmp97 ... I have no objection to umpires who allow it to happen -- especially since there is a contradiction in the book.

My strong encouragement, no matter what the rule discussion, is that umpires take ALL the relevant and pertinent rules into consideration and think through how to apply them them logically. Way too often we have umpires who stop at one rule or *gasp* never even read a rule because they were "told" about a possible interpretation.

I also hope NFHS actually fixes the contradiction with an administrative change (not a rules change or an interpretation) that fixes the language in the book. I will give them props that they seem to be doing more of this (one the softball side) in recent years.

It drives me up a wall when interpretations are used to "fix" things ... the baseball side's committee has said that they often use interpretations rather than fixing rules because the process is simpler. The problem is, the rule book is still broken. You expect new umpires to use the book, but that does no good if your "rules" are NOT IN THE BOOK. Add to that the fact that you have to BUY case plays from NFHS and you have set up a broken system.

Here is a really fun one ... You can download the MLB rule book (The Official Rules of Baseball) online for free. This year, the pitch clock is a new rule that has been a major topic of conversation. Find the pitch clock rules in the OBR book.