Yes another Ump gripe.... (look away if ya need to)

[chinamigarden]

Well my friends, I got my first official response from a TD on IP's tonight. I'm trying to type while while wiping the tears from my eyes. Lord help us all. This is the EXACT ( caps and all ) response, minus the GIF and contact info.

I AM NO PUTTING UP WITH ANY ILLEGAL PLAYERS IF I NO THEY ARE

I prefer the more gentle sounding. Un-documented Players.

 

[RubberBiscuit]

I prefer the more gentle sounding. Un-documented Players.

ROFL ChiMi !

Next we'll have an Un-documented pitcher march on Washington !!!!!

God I love the smartness of this country.....

 

[SoCal_Dad]

I don't believe I did that, or at least was not meant to appear that way. I talked about Rule 12 when the discussion was about umpires taking instructions from TDs or UICs to ignore or apply certain rules around showcases and other tournaments. However, as I noted, apparently they do it anyway. You need to remember, many of the commissioners are all about registration and participation and pretty much handle that teams which choose to advance beyond their tournament do so at their own risk.
Glad to hear it wasn't intentional. Unfortunately, you never mentioned non-championship play and your statement about championship play immediately followed the reference to Rule 12, so it appeared to be a recap of the rule.

I'm referring solely to ASA and I agree, some doing it is no excuse. However, just about every sanctioning body has commissioners and directors that shake and move and fudge whatever they can to get the teams, games and tournaments. But you should be aware of the variations local association apply since your area has the infamous Yellow Book.

What issue(s) do you have with SoCal ASA's Yellow Book (http://www.socal-asa.org/jo/forms/YellowBook.pdf)? It provides most of the information leagues and teams need to operate in one document. A lot of it comes from ASA Code and the rest is local rules that are allowed by the Code. It also pulls in other information that is of interest to teams in our association (e.g. qualifiers and Western Nats). It sure beats not having the local rules documented and being at the mercy of whatever the commissioner happens to decree at a moment.

 

[MTR]

What issue(s) do you have with SoCal ASA's Yellow Book (http://www.socal-asa.org/jo/forms/YellowBook.pdf)? It provides most of the information leagues and teams need to operate in one document. A lot of it comes from ASA Code and the rest is local rules that are allowed by the Code. It also pulls in other information that is of interest to teams in our association (e.g. qualifiers and Western Nats). It sure beats not having the local rules documented and being at the mercy of whatever the commissioner happens to decree at a moment.

Agreement forms, anything that references high school, releases, roster restrictions, invasive rules into team operation, etc. that are more restrictive than ASA's code. That's just me, but it would be nice if people knew (and many do not) that this applied to SoCal, not the rest of the country.

 

[Umpire]

Where do I not accept you explanation of the origins of the rule? I simply stated that I don't know if it is insane. What is insane is that rules like this are necessary only because somewhere along the way some moron decided common sense wasn't good enough and challenged anyone authority to do whatever he pleased.

I know it happens. Teams chatter across the field, so why put someone in the line of fire or a position to taunt even more freely. AFAIC, doing this just places that much more babysitting responsibilities on the umpire crew that would be more of a distraction than anything else.

I see what you are saying now. Overall, I think coaches need to be more cognizant of what is occurring in and around their dugouts.

 

[SoCal_Dad]

Agreement forms, anything that references high school, releases, roster restrictions, invasive rules into team operation, etc. that are more restrictive than ASA's code. That's just me, but it would be nice if people knew (and many do not) that this applied to SoCal, not the rest of the country.

ASA Code purposely delegates authority so regions and associations can determine how they operate locally. Just because a local rule is more restrictive than ASA Code doesn't make it wrong. They're only wrong if they conflict with ASA Code.
- The agreement forms were discontinued a few years ago. A couple references to them remain and should be removed.
- Releases are only controlled to comply with ASA Code.
- Their "invasive rules" require teams provide a budget to team members (usually done) and an accounting afterward (rarely done).
- The HS references and roster restrictions are part of their classification criteria for Class B, which they are responsible for establishing and administering per ASA Code. SoCal ASA draws a hard line to keep Class A (travel) separate from Class B (rec).

Lots of people think their local rules apply everywhere and SoCal is no different.

 

[MTR]

ASA Code purposely delegates authority so regions and associations can determine how they operate locally. Just because a local rule is more restrictive than ASA Code doesn't make it wrong. They're only wrong if they conflict with ASA Code.

I didn't say they were wrong, did I. I don't believe they are right, but that is my personal opinion.

- The agreement forms were discontinued a few years ago. A couple references to them remain and should be removed.

These type of things are okay for intra-conference/league situations, but not championship play. And in spite of what has be determined, I still find it difficult to believe they would hold up in a court...then again, you are in the Ninth Circuit

- Releases are only controlled to comply with ASA Code.

Releases are only a recent add to the code and applies under a single specific circumstance.

- Their "invasive rules" require teams provide a budget to team members (usually done) and an accounting afterward (rarely done).

Don't care, it is no one's business except the team/organization/league.

- The HS references and roster restrictions are part of their classification criteria for Class B, which they are responsible for establishing and administering per ASA Code. SoCal ASA draws a hard line to keep Class A (travel) separate from Class B (rec).

Somebody is selling some swamp land with that one. ASA Code clearly defines the difference between A and B classification and there really is no need for any additional parameters. However, this is another point where commissioners set their own definitions of "class" to a team regardless of whether it qualifies under the code. And just for clarification, the term "high school" does not appear in the ASA Code.

Lots of people think their local rules apply everywhere and SoCal is no different.

Game rules, yes. Code restrictions, I don't think so much. I've had a lot of people try to cite the Yellow Book as bible. I believe some actually believe it IS the ASA Code even though a cursory scan would easily indicate to the reader it is not. Even at a NQ at which I was the UIC a few years ago, folks from a couple SoCal teams were beating up the host JO Commissioner telling him how wrong he was even though he was showing them a copy of the ASA Code in question.

 

[SoCal_Dad]

I didn't say they were wrong, did I. I don't believe they are right, but that is my personal opinion.
Semantics...

These type of things are okay for intra-conference/league situations, but not championship play. And in spite of what has be determined, I still find it difficult to believe they would hold up in a court...then again, you are in the Ninth Circuit
What part of "discontinued" did you not understand? If we had any control over the Ninth Circuit, they would be relocated a few hundred miles west...

Releases are only a recent add to the code and applies under a single specific circumstance.
Releases aren't new - they existed under VTD and continued under RegisterASA. ASA Code didn't care about them until they were allowed after a roster has been red-lined.

Don't care, it is no one's business except the team/organization/league.
Like you said, it's only your opinion...

Somebody is selling some swamp land with that one. ASA Code clearly defines the difference between A and B classification and there really is no need for any additional parameters. However, this is another point where commissioners set their own definitions of "class" to a team regardless of whether it qualifies under the code. And just for clarification, the term "high school" does not appear in the ASA Code.
LOL! You're the one selling swamp land. Please cite where it is defined for Girls FP. ASA has 1 statement regarding Girls Class B FP (i.e. players have to come from a league) and it is ignored in many areas of the country. Classification for JO FP is primarily controlled by the associations and regions as delegated to them in Article 307 A-E. Again, they can factor in anything they want as long as it doesn't conflict with the Code. It's the same concept as the hierarchy of federal, state, county and municipal laws.

Game rules, yes. Code restrictions, I don't think so much. I've had a lot of people try to cite the Yellow Book as bible. I believe some actually believe it IS the ASA Code even though a cursory scan would easily indicate to the reader it is not. Even at a NQ at which I was the UIC a few years ago, folks from a couple SoCal teams were beating up the host JO Commissioner telling him how wrong he was even though he was showing them a copy of the ASA Code in question.
The percentage of people outside SoCal that are familiar with the Code is no better than in SoCal - it's very low across the country. There are issues with other associations not going by the Code, so the SoCal folks may have been right and they just referenced the wrong source since most of the Yellow Book is from the Code. What were the issues?

Many of the remaining articles in the Code were renumbered last year after they broke out large portions into the Procedural Manual. Is ASA going to fix the incorrect Code references in the playing rules this year (e.g. Rule 12 references Article 520)?

 

[MTR]

What part of "discontinued" did you not understand?

Just making an observation. You're still allowed that in CA, aren't you?

If we had any control over the Ninth Circuit, they would be relocated a few hundred miles west...

Not far enough

Releases aren't new - they existed under VTD and continued under RegisterASA. ASA Code didn't care about them until they were allowed after a roster has been red-lined.

Releases are relatively new. It used to be once a player participated in a class of championship play, the player was locked into the roster until the end of that season's championships for that class was complete. At one time, it was not uncommon for a player to sign multiple rosters prior to a season and then make a decision when it came time for championship play. What happened locally is whatever locals wanted to do and there really wasn't much ASA could do about it since the commissioners are the ones that sign off on the rosters submitted for championship play. This happens more in SP, but the code was same for both.

LOL! You're the one selling swamp land. Please cite where it is defined for Girls FP. ASA has 1 statement regarding Girls Class B FP (i.e. players have to come from a league) and it is ignored in many areas of the country.

No reason for me to quote Article 307.H.3.d since you already did. So what that it is one sentence, how simpler can it get?

Classification for JO FP is primarily controlled by the associations and regions as delegated to them in Article 307 A-E. Again, they can factor in anything they want as long as it doesn't conflict with the Code. It's the same concept as the hierarchy of federal, state, county and municipal laws.

And moving away from the league restriction would be a conflict with the code, wouldn't it? A few years ago there was talk of changing the FP classification to the same as SP where teams were classified by a board, but the fear that has been realized in SP squashed any thought of doing that in FP.

The percentage of people outside SoCal that are familiar with the Code is no better than in SoCal - it's very low across the country. There are issues with other associations not going by the Code, so the SoCal folks may have been right and they just referenced the wrong source since most of the Yellow Book is from the Code. What were the issues?

These folks we from SoCal and I don't think it was an issue with the tournament, but part of a general discussion. I believe it was a discussion on rosters, but I wasn't part of it nor did I want to be. When a UIC, I have a tendency to stay clear of TDs unless there is cause to have a discussion. They have enough on their plate, as do I, to get in each other's way.

 

[SoCal_Dad]

Releases are relatively new.
Hard to tell what an oldtimer like yourself considers 'relatively new' - is it 1-2 years, 3-5, 6-10, 11+? Releases from a redlined roster are relatively new, but they exist for regular team rosters too and that goes back to VTD at least.
It used to be once a player participated in a class of championship play, the player was locked into the roster until the end of that season's championships for that class was complete. At one time, it was not uncommon for a player to sign multiple rosters prior to a season and then make a decision when it came time for championship play.
How did they get their name on multiple rosters? RegisterASA (and VTD before that) only allow a player to be on one roster at a time and the player has to be released from a roster before they can be added onto another roster.
What happened locally is whatever locals wanted to do and there really wasn't much ASA could do about it since the commissioners are the ones that sign off on the rosters submitted for championship play. This happens more in SP, but the code was same for both.
I suspect there are still issues in some areas where teams just submit a new updated roster at the next qualifier instead of sticking with the roster that was redlined at the previous qualifier. At some point, ASA needs to require TournamentASA be used for all championship play events and integrate it with RegisterASA so they can enforce the roster rules. BTW, ASA Code says the commissioners signature doesn't means squat regarding the eligibility of a team or its players.

FWIW, the window for getting released from a redlined roster varies by the schedule for an association and region. In SoCal, there is no window for 10U and 12U because the State tourney is the first event. The window is only 1-3 weeks for the other age groups. The window is very large in areas that run qualifiers throughout the year for ASA Nats (i.e. territorial) and/or schedule their local association championship later in the season.

No reason for me to quote Article 307.H.3.d since you already did. So what that it is one sentence, how simpler can it get?
A requirement for Class B doesn't constitute a clear definition of "the difference between A and B classification." It also doesn't help that it is placed under the restricted classification rules and at the end of a paragraph.

And moving away from the league restriction would be a conflict with the code, wouldn't it?
It doesn't conflict with it - it just adds another restriction which they are entitled to do under Article 308.A:
These tournaments are open to registered member teams in accordance with the rules and regulations of the local association, provided such rules and regulations are not in conflict or inconsistent with this Code or the established policies of the ASA.
A few years ago there was talk of changing the FP classification to the same as SP where teams were classified by a board, but the fear that has been realized in SP squashed any thought of doing that in FP.
I presume you're talking about a national board because the Code provides for association and regional boards for FP.

These folks we from SoCal and I don't think it was an issue with the tournament, but part of a general discussion. I believe it was a discussion on rosters, but I wasn't part of it nor did I want to be. ...
Yellow Book makes some attributions to ASA Code, but it could do a better job of identifying local rules vs the Code. It's only an issue for the 1-2% that play outside SoCal.

No response to my question about cleaning up the Code references in the playing rules?

I'm also curious to see if Rule 5-5B[1]'s wording is cleaned up after being characterized in the July 2013 Plays and Clarifications as "hard to understand" and "not written as clearly as we may like." Any rule's wording that requires a published clarification like that should be fixed at the first opportunity...