- May 29, 2015
- 3,815
- 113
If it can deliver my water or Body Armor (drink) also, I’ll chip in a game check! I hate having bottles on the field.
Player Conferences
- Thread starter varefump
- Start date
Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch
Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.
If it can deliver my water or Body Armor (drink) also, I’ll chip in a game check! I hate having bottles on the field.
- May 13, 2023
- 1,538
- 113
Thank you!! Let's include umpire gear on that. When see the Umpire has their water behind home plate, on the ground or in the fence, or in a spot where the ball could karem off it.... hello let's not get your snack bag in the play of the game please!
kindly said but I absolutely mean it 
I hate that too. No ump would allow the catcher/ first/third/ or corner OF to put their drinks next to their position in foul territory.Thank you!! Let's include umpire gear on that. When see the Umpire has their water behind home plate, on the ground or in the fence, or in a spot where the ball could karem off it.... hello let's not get your snack bag in the play of the game please!
- Jun 8, 2016
- 16,118
- 113
I hate water bottles on the field too…
Add a water bottle holster to their utility belt.Thank you!! Let's include umpire gear on that. When see the Umpire has their water behind home plate, on the ground or in the fence, or in a spot where the ball could karem off it.... hello let's not get your snack bag in the play of the game please!
- May 29, 2015
- 3,815
- 113
This whole things is just a false-flag operation, a ploy by NHFS to get us to agree with allowing electronic communication.
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."
So the catcher requested time to meet with the pitcher. While that takes place, the batter and runner on second trot over to the third-base coach's box to talk with the coach. Why are we charging a conference here? Did the third-base coach request and was granted Time? No; in fact, Time was already out. Why should the umpire have to grant a second time-out when time was already called?
It would be the same if the umpire calls Time to get new softballs because they ran out of them, or a base has to be reset on its anchor, or the centerfielder is running in to get their sunglasses, or any other time that play was suspended. If while that's taking place the batter or runner goes to talk to the base coach, who cares?
Only NCAA and USSSA address this as requiring an assessed conference. NFHS, USA, NSA, WBSC, Little League, and maybe other softball sanctions that I'm not aware of do not restrict runners and batters from talking to their base coaches when play has been suspended. As long as the offense is ready when the umpire is going to put the ball back in play, no offensive conference took place because the offensive coach didn't request it and didn't need Time granted.
Maybe you can explain it to me then, and I understand this is getting into the philosophy of the call.
Why then do we (most umpires) charge the defensive when their coach approaches the circle when F1/F2 are meeting? But, don't charge a conference when offensive coach calls their runners over, during the same F1/F2 meeting (no defensive coach)? To use your words time was already out, so should a second time-out be granted? Sould the defensive coach get a free conference? If we do not have a charged conference, then why doesn't every coach in High School just have their player call a time-out and then meet?
I am just trying to understand the philosophy behind how/why it is called that way. By strict definition a conference is only charged when the coach or bench/dugout personnel requests it. From a coaching standpoint, why not get a leg up in the game and have your players call time and not be charged, no violation would ever occur and you can meet with your player(s) as often as you want.
Here's the philosophy behind the conference rule. It's essentially designed to minimize the number of times a team delays the game to have a coach or other team representative talk to the players for coaching purposes. We charge a conference in your scenario because the team that initiated that delay in the game had a coach come out and provide instruction to the players. Basically, F2 requested and was granted Time on behalf of their coach. If the coach had stayed in the dugout and stayed mum, then they wouldn't be charged with a conference. That's also why we charge a conference when F2 requests and is granted Time, goes to the dugout to get instructions from the coach, then goes to F1 to pass those instructions along.
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.
Doubt I'll ever see this happen, but suppose the bases are loaded and R2 decides she wants R1 and R3 to meet with her by second base to talk strategy. So she requests and is granted Time and calls both over. While they have their little pow-wow by second base, the defensive head coach calls F1 and F2 over to the front of the dugout and passes on some info to them. I would not charge a conference to the defense. They didn't initiate the game delay, so why penalize them? As long as we're ready to go when R1 and R3 return to their bases, all's good.
Thank you for that, but again I will disagree. While I understand your philosophy and justification behind it and it makes since. I still don't see it that way. When a coach becomes involved, with coaching, it should a charged conference regardless of how or why the stoppage occurred.
So yes, I can see why it is not charged, but I since a coach is now involved some has to be charged. I asked earlier a hypothetical that would not be so farfetched. F2 ask for time is granted, when the catcher gets to the circle the 3rd base coach calls over the runners on 2nd and 3rd, once the runners get there, the pitching coach comes out to talk with F1/F2. Who gets charged a conference?
Also, by strict reading of the book and no case play found no it, a player can call on behalf of their coach. The definition as stated is coach and/or bench/dugout personnel, not player on behalf of the coach. So would the player running over to their base coach justify a charged conference if they can call on behalf of the coach. So by strict reading of the book if a player calls time and is granted and the coach joins it should never be charged. It just doesn't add up to me.
A player-to-player conference is never charged in HS, when a coach joins it becomes a charged conference. This should be done regardless of who caused or why the delay was caused. We are able to charge a coach a conference during an injury, if they provide coaching outside of treatment of the injury, even if we as the umpires called time without a request from the coach. You can even charge a conference if we believe a player is faking an illness/injury. Why would player-to-player be different?
BTW, yes, I would charge the defense in that situation same as I would the offense for the reverse that we are talking about. For the same reason as above. If the defense coach called time talk to their infield and then the offense coach talked to their runners, but when the defense coach breaks the huddle and the offense coach is told let's go and they say "hold on" or something like that or just stay there we charge them both.
