Is this warning given to the player, coach, or both?

Do both teams get a warning or is the first warning for both teams?

 

KY Thorobred,

It's the penalty part of NFHS 1-5-1. The warning goes to the coach of the offending team only, not the player. It's a team warning (not an individual warning). The next member of the team who deliberately removes his helmet during a live ball (after the warning) is ejected. The other team is not affected. They would be subject to getting a warning first as well.

KY Thorobred,

It's the penalty part of NFHS 1-5-1. The warning goes to the coach of the offending team only, not the player. It's a team warning (not an individual warning). The next member of the team who deliberately removes his helmet during a live ball (after the warning) is ejected. The other team is not affected. They would be subject to getting a warning first as well.

 

Thanks

 

Can a player be limited to a dugout just like a coach can be or can the player only be ejected?

Champions don't have off nights when it counts.

 

Thank you.

Thanks

 

Can a player be limited to a dugout just like a coach can be or can the player only be ejected?

 

KY Thorobred,

 

In the section of the NFHS rulebook relative to bench and field conduct, the restriction option is only mentioned in relation to coaches behavior. When a penalty for a violation of a player conduct rule is mentioned, ejection is the only option.

There is a picture in the Lexington Herald-Leader of a Lex Cath player running over the Danville catcher, but it doesn't say anything about him being tossed. The catcher is up the line and the runner obviously didn't make any attempt to avoid the collision. It really is a shame that the same play in 2 games can be ruled so different that it costs a player a game at Applebee's Park.

 

http://www.kentucky.com/813/story/821013.html

 

Click on other pictures and you can see it for yourself

There is a picture in the Lexington Herald-Leader of a Lex Cath player running over the Danville catcher, but it doesn't say anything about him being tossed. The catcher is up the line and the runner obviously didn't make any attempt to avoid the collision. It really is a shame that the same play in 2 games can be ruled so different that it costs a player a game at Applebee's Park.

 

http://www.kentucky.com/813/story/821013.html

 

Click on other pictures and you can see it for yourself

 

That's why they're called "judgment calls."

 

The pic does make it seem like an ejection was warranted but without seeing it live we don't know if the runner had time to make an adjustment.

Surely Dye's attempt couldn't look any worse than his.

That's why they're called "judgment calls."

 

 

I understand it is a judgement call, but the same judgement should be made on the same type of play.

I understand it is a judgement call, but the same judgement should be made on the same type of play.

 

People have there own opinions. How could something be judged the same by multiple people? That is not possible.

There is a picture in the Lexington Herald-Leader of a Lex Cath player running over the Danville catcher, but it doesn't say anything about him being tossed. The catcher is up the line and the runner obviously didn't make any attempt to avoid the collision. It really is a shame that the same play in 2 games can be ruled so different that it costs a player a game at Applebee's Park.

 

http://www.kentucky.com/813/story/821013.html

 

Click on other pictures and you can see it for yourself

 

I understand your dismay for your player. I do not think you can say what happened from a still shot. Maybe the throw brought the catcher into the runners path on accident. Maybe the runner was trying to avoid and lost his balance, who knows. It is a shame the player may not get to play. Best of luck!

 

:deadhorse:

People have there own opinions. How could something be judged the same by multiple people? That is not possible.

 

I would hope it is possible. If they can't judge something the same way, then they are in the wrong profession. That is the problem you could have vastly different strike zones with officials in the same association and obviously if you accidently hit a catcher, with one ump you will get tossed and with the other it will be okay.

I understand your dismay for your player. I do not think you can say what happened from a still shot. Maybe the throw brought the catcher into the runners path on accident. Maybe the runner was trying to avoid and lost his balance, who knows. It is a shame the player may not get to play. Best of luck!

 

:deadhorse:

 

Go to wkyt.com

Click on Sports and watch the telecast from Friday @ 11. The boy lowers his shoulder and runs over the catcher (as pointed out by the broadcaster) and nothing happens except for his run scoring. It is pitiful that the same play can have 2 extremely different outcomes.

http://www.wkyt.com?autoStart=true&topVideoCatNo=default&clipId=3838644

Obviously no attempt by the Lex Cath player to avoid contact.

Based on what I have read and the pic, it looks like the ump in the Lex Cath game made a mistake. The player should have been called out and tossed from the game.