foot on the plate during at bat

[canyonjoe]

On the question of using the time to your advantage, I don't have a problem with doing anything that's part of a normal game.

Taking a couple of pitches is legit. We had a kid a few tourneys ago foul off 8 or 9 pitches before popping out that killed the time in a 2-1 game. If she did that on purpose, more power to her.

I'm not a fan of mound conferences or batter conferences to waste time. The worst to me is to change pitchers just to stall for 5 minutes.

I understand why coaches do it, but I have my DD play TB to play more innings not less. To me it's a lot nicer to end the game on a 6-3 grounder than to have the ump staring at his clock.

I really like watching teams that hustle out in the field each and every inning and try to play as much ball as possible.

 

[Rocketech1]

I don't see the logic in ending the 5th inning early after you had tied the score and were positioned for the top seed. If you had let it play out, the 6th inning wouldn't have started. IOW, you gave the other team a chance to win by playing the clock instead of the game.

Just to clarify (sorry its been several years since this happened), the drop dead could have happened in the 5th inning and even though we tied the score, had time expired before the end of the inning the score would have reverted back to the 4th when we were losing. Had we continued to score more runs and tried to win the game in the 5th, we might have been out of time. So once we tied the game in the 5th all we had to do was get out of the inning and there wasn't enough time left in the 6th inning for both teams to complete their at-bats before time expired. A tie gave us the #1 seed over this team because of run differential in the two previous games.

Hope that makes sense?

 

[smddad]

This is what happens when you put a time limit on a game that is not designed to have a time limit. Clock management is part of any game that is timed. If a manager is not managing the clock, then they are not doing their job.

A coach cannot instruct a player to deliberately violate a rule. At least I better not hear it. This is especially true if the team is going to gain an advantage from it. There's also a rule that states that the umpire is not to enforce the penalty for a violation if doing so would benefit the offending team.

This goes far beyond "strategy."

So...you don't want to hear me tell a runner to leave early when the defensive team cannot seem to buy an out?

 

[MTR]

Home team up to bat, behind in the score. They are at the bottom of their line up with only two minutes left on the clock. Coach told girl to put her foot on the plate and swing at the pitch regardless of its location. He was trying to get his girls out fast so they would start a new inning and he would then have stronger part of the lineup at bat. Doesn't the batter have to make contact and not just swing to be out for stepping on the plate?

There are rules that can put an end to this and no one here is going to like them.

Not all rule sets have a provision to ignore a rule violation or not enforce it if they believe the wrong team gains an advantage.

Speaking ASA

Game can be forfeited if a team after being warned a team violates any game rules and/or a team uses any tactics noticeably designed to delay or hasten the game.

Very drastic application, but if you have coaches that simply ignore directions of an umpire to move on with the game, what else is s/he to do? Odds are the coach would get dumped first, but when it comes down to it, it may be the only option the umpire has.

 

[Umpire]

I've put a stop to it before. Keep in mind that there is a significant difference, in my perspective, in telling your player to step off the base to BENEFIT the OPPOSITION, then directing a player to violate a rule to benefit her own team.

 

[SoCal_Dad]

Just to clarify (sorry its been several years since this happened), the drop dead could have happened in the 5th inning and even though we tied the score, had time expired before the end of the inning the score would have reverted back to the 4th when we were losing. Had we continued to score more runs and tried to win the game in the 5th, we might have been out of time. So once we tied the game in the 5th all we had to do was get out of the inning and there wasn't enough time left in the 6th inning for both teams to complete their at-bats before time expired. A tie gave us the #1 seed over this team because of run differential in the two previous games.

Hope that makes sense?

It would have been safer to end the 5th inning after the no-new inning time limit, which is probably what would have happened if you had let it play out. It worked out for you, but it could of cost you the game if the other team ended their half of the 6th right after scoring and retired your team before time expired. IMO, it was premature to play the clock.

Unfortunately, revert rules aren't formalized and vary by the event's rules. Common sense rules don't revert in all cases and never to the detriment of the home team, which a revert is supposed to protect. They also reduce clock gamesmanship.
- Scores always revert in the top of the inning.
- Scores don't revert in the bottom of the inning if the home team is ahead - score stands.
- Scores don't revert to a loss for the home team if the game is tied - score stands.
- Scores revert in all other cases.

 

[Rocketech1]

It would have been safer to end the 5th inning after the no-new inning time limit, which is probably what would have happened if you had let it play out. It worked out for you, but it could of cost you the game if the other team ended their half of the 6th right after scoring and retired your team before time expired. IMO, it was premature to play the clock.

Unfortunately, revert rules aren't formalized and vary by the event's rules. Common sense rules don't revert in all cases and never to the detriment of the home team, which a revert is supposed to protect. They also reduce clock gamesmanship.
- Scores always revert in the top of the inning.
- Scores don't revert in the bottom of the inning if the home team is ahead - score stands.
- Scores don't revert to a loss for the home team if the game is tied - score stands.
- Scores revert in all other cases.

Thanks for the comments. Trust me on this one, we did exactly the right thing. Did you read my clarification, the 5th inning would have been drop dead had we not completed the inning and there was no No New Inning rule. Once we tied the game in the 5th we had to get to the next inning ASAP or the score would have reverted back to the previous inning (4th) when we were losing. In the 6th inning there was only a few minutes left and not enough time for the visiting team to complete their at-bats let alone our team to complete ours. By trying to win the game in the 5th as you suggest, we likely would have ran out of time in that inning; the score reverts back to the 4th and we lose the game, get the #2 seed, don't get the Bye, and might not have made it to the championship game.

Since this tournament had many teams and limited fields, they created these local Drop Dead rules (1.30) to speed up play and get all of the games in. Maybe not fair but I thought our clock management was correct in this situation.

 

[Cobb_of_Fury]

I always prefer - "Finish the Inning" to "Drop Dead" even if its a much shorter game time. It just seems the most natural to the game.

 

[SoCal_Dad]

Thanks for the comments. Trust me on this one, we did exactly the right thing. Did you read my clarification, the 5th inning would have been drop dead had we not completed the inning and there was no No New Inning rule.

I don't see any indication in your prior clarification that there was not a no-new inning rule. I would have replied differently if there was.

I understand the need and usage of Drop Dead limits. Proper revert rules don't disadvantage a home team.

 

[Rocketech1]

I don't see any indication in your prior clarification that there was not a no-new inning rule. I would have replied differently if there was.

I understand the need and usage of Drop Dead limits. Proper revert rules don't disadvantage a home team.

I had gone back and updated the original post, I should have been more clear with my original explanation. Thanks.