Does anyone else out there have any problems with the numbering system either NFHS or NCAA use? For me at least, it would be a whole lot easier if everyone used the OBR template rather than some made up conglomeration they came up with, for whatever reason.

I used to think it was because these other organizations just didn’t want to pay MLB a fee to keep from getting nailed in a copyright infringement suit, but then I saw that LLI’s rulebook uses MLB’s template exactly, plus it too has a copyright attached to it.

Yes, when you read the casebook and you have R1 on third I get messed up on a difficult play.

What both of you have indicated is true relative to confusion that can be caused with different numbering systems in the different books. However, I don't get frustrated by it.
Over time I've simply become used to the differences and I just have to make it a point to be aware of what code I'm using at any given time. April and May are easiest for me since the only ball I officiate in that time period is High School. (Fed Rules exclusively)
When June arrives things get a bit stickier. Different levels of ball and different rule books for each level. And the most dreaded of all...the occasional league that mixes rules from OBR and Fed.
Not frustrating but definitely more difficult to administer.

pilsner,

I don’t ump, but I do keep score, and that means in order to do it correctly, like umps, I do have to use the rules I’m stuck with. What’s most frustrating for me is the trying to find something in the book that I need. Its gotten a whole lot easier after 5 years of having to use the NFHS book, but its still a pain in the backside sitting at a game and trying to find something in a hurry.

I’m hoping to finally get an electronic copy of that book this year, which will make it a whole lot easier for me to look things up when I have access to a ‘puter.

The thing I’ve run into that’s most irritating about using HS rules is when you go to a big event like the Jr Oly tourney, and they say right up front that they’re using NFHS rules. the problem with that is, there are things that can change from state to state, or even league to league that can cause problems. The “speed up” rules come immediately to mind.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by pilsner:
What both of you have indicated is true relative to confusion that can be caused with different numbering systems in the different books. However, I don't get frustrated by it.
Over time I've simply become used to the differences and I just have to make it a point to be aware of what code I'm using at any given time. April and May are easiest for me since the only ball I officiate in that time period is High School. (Fed Rules exclusively)
When June arrives things get a bit stickier.


It simply makes me read it a couple of times to make sure I have it right. When you have multible runners and R3 ends up on second it makes you think. Maybe that isn't really a bad thing just different.

Anybody owned or looked at a copy of Childress' book on Baseball Rule Differences? I was wondering how easy it was to use as an on-field reference. Also, from everything I've heard, it is organized according to the OBR hierarchical structure, but cross-references back to the related rule differences for college or high school.

The BRD is organized in its own style. There are about 500 numbered articles, basically organized alphabetically. For example, one article is entitled Interference by: Runner: Visual. Another article is Scoring: Sacrifice. And, Awards To: Runner: First play by infielder: Fielding batted ball.
Typically it lists rules for FED, NCAA, and OBR. It is very good both for rules differences, and for clarifying ambiguous sections of OBR.
Jaksa Roder is another very useful book on the rules. It is more aimed at OBR rules, but is organized quite differently. There are 26 or so chapters. For example, chapter 6 is titled Batter or Batter-Runner Out, Not out. Chapter 4 is titled Designated Hitter. Chapter 9 is Appeals, and this is a good example of material gathered together which in OBR is scattered all over the book. I personally think it is the best book for learning and remembering the rules of baseball. JEA and MLBUM may be better, but ordinary folks can't buy them.


BRD is available at http://www.officiating.com/
J/R at http://rulesofbaseball.com/

Both are good but I would never use it as an onfield reference. It's great to read at home or keep in the car for the after party to look up something that happened.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael S. Taylor:
Both are good but I would never use it as an onfield reference. It's great to read at home or keep in the car for the after party to look up something that happened.

I’ve never read either of them, but I seriously doubt that I would. When I “NEED a book at a game as an SK, I generally have plenty of time to find what I want in the “real” book I need, because all I’m doing is trying to get something scored correctly. But when I’m at the house and doing the final checking of the sheet, I have the latest copy of the rule set I’m using, either electronically on the computer, or in a book form at hand.

The way the rules change every year, I’d just never trust a book that purported to show all the differences between all the rules. there’s just no way on earth a book like that can be right all the time.

The BRD is published every year....after the rules changes are announced...

I buy the BRD... its very handy..for those of us who call mulitple codes....but to me there is no such thing as an "on the field" reference.

quote:

Originally posted by piaa_ump:
The BRD is published every year....after the rules changes are announced...

I buy the BRD... its very handy..for those of us who call mulitple codes....but to me there is no such thing as an "on the field" reference.

I don’t doubt that it’s a fine tool, and that should be obvious by its continued publication. Also, since I’ve never seen it, I really can’t say how good, dad or helpful it is.

What I can say is, for regular old fans, spending anything on a rule book when MLB and NCAA freely publish theirs, is asking a lot. For guys like me who keep score, I have serious doubts as to how the many tiny little differences in the different rule sets can be fairly treated and still keep their meaning intact.

I guess I’m just being an old hardhead. I’m hoping that sooner or later, all the idiots who feel that the “Official Rules of Baseball” need to be modified in order to meet the needs of their different organizations, will all go to using the OBR template, then find an acceptable way to show the modifications.

And that's why I asked about Childress' BRD, SK. I was also aware of and interested in J/R so thanks to 3Fingered and MST for your constructive comments on these efforts. There are better ways to skin a cat than the OBR, either in format or in content, and it sounds like there are good ideas for future evolution of the presentation of rules at all levels here, regardless of what the hardheads think.

quote:

Originally posted by GasMe:
There are better ways to skin a cat than the OBR, either in format or in content, and it sounds like there are good ideas for future evolution of the presentation of rules at all levels here, regardless of what the hardheads think.

There are and always will be alternative ideas in both content and format, for everything, not just the rules of baseball. But, there does need to be some sort of hierarchy, and since MLB is the highest level at which the game can be played in this country, it only seems logical that they’re the one’s who set the template.

As far as content goes, for most folks like those here who like to chat about the game, as opposed to officiate, the content the NCAA uses is by far superior to either OBR or NFHS. I like it because it has all kinds of things imbedded within the rules that make it a lot easier to understand, especially the ARs.

But one has to understand that OBR doesn’t NEED to be as “user friendly. Every one of the officials and others to whom the rules apply, are getting paid, and thus have much more of an incentive to understand them. FI, the umps who do pro games are forced to actually learn the rules by attending ML approved umpiring schools. They don’t need all the little explanations like us amateurs do. But even OBR is beginning to put in more comments that make the rules more readable and understandable.

Here’s the bottom line to me. As long as the ML exists, the rules it uses to play the game should always take precedence. After that, all anyone needs to do if they want to modify the way the game is conducted, is to note what the logic behind the difference is, and then say: Rule “***X” is superceded by Rule “ZZZZZ”.

That way, no matter what happened, it would be a piece of cake to reference OBR in case the change, shall we say, lacked clarity.

It may well be that hardheads like me are wrong, but if that’s so, why is it that we so often have to correct people who can’t even manage to quote the rules they play under?

Dont you use the rules for the level you are scoring/umpiring at?


And who are you to correct people ??? Are u some kind of expert ?


You are getting boring with your "everyone is dumber/stupider than you" routine

Getting back on topic...

MST, 3F, piaa or anyone else who has actually used the BRD or Jaksa/Roder:
Can you provide an example or two of how and why you've found these references to be useful? Do you personally find their organization to be intuitive and/or easy to use? And finally, do they provide ample pertinent case examples by section or chapter to assist with interpretation?

Thanks in advance.

TR: check PMs.

I'm going to withdraw my previous request, with apologies to PIAA, Three Finger, and MST amongst others.

Did a search on Childress & Jaksa/Roder, and found a wealth of good information and opinions on this forum's archives. You convinced me of the value of these books. Thanks for sharing your valuable experiences with them.

As a training official I try to use whatever means I can to increase my knowledge and understanding of whatever code I'm using and to be clear on the differences and conflicts between them. The BRD and Roder's book do this. For every code, whether it is Fed, NCAA or OBR, they all have interp books that explain or clarify their rules. LL has the Right Call, Rim and interp book. Obr has has a minor league interp book and MLB had the MLBUM to explain their rules. Other bodies that use OBR have their version. All these are needed to do our job to the best of our ability. For those that know of the changes added to the OBR last year and this year they are simply interps that have been in their manuals for quite a while but are just now being added to the book. For any that have seen the italized section in OBR, they are the same thing. Theyare interps that were added to the book in the '70s. I have come across books on scoring that help interprete rule 10, I have no knowledge of their worth because I don't score games but it is a possible source of knowledge. I see no need to assume they are flawed just because they aren't from the sactioning body.

MST and I are both training officials and also chapter rules interpreters, so having multiple rules sources and reference guides are neccesary...

I have a brief case that I take to games with me. Since I call mulitple codes I have OBR, PONY, NFHS, NCAA, Legion rule books and the Jaksa/Roder and Childress' BRD.

AS far as the J/R is concerned it is reported to be the first logical assimilation of baseball rules, meaning that all rules found throughout the rule book are condensed into one relavent section.(EG: all pitching rules are in the pitching section etc.)..I do like it, but to confess I like the BRD better.

I find myself referring to the BRD most often since when I am looking up a rule I can also refresh my memory on the other versions at the same time.

Childress also adds some history and official interps from the association heads that add to clarity.

No one guide is the end all for umpires, so if you aspire to do higher ball or have clarity on rules origins, procedures and mechanincs, these multiple sources are a must in my opinion.

scorekeeper


First of all I have no "exalted position" as you claim unless it is in your mind


And neither you anyone else threatens me--I am too old and too secure for that game

I think "ITS" has you pegged--you have a deepseated problem wherein you need justification for your being a scorekeeper---a round here the HS scorekeeper is a HS student who might pick up a few bucks for doing the job and they do a darn good job