About that Protest ....
This letter, written to a fictitious coach, is designed to provide background on an area where we all can improve our game knowledge and understanding. You can contribute your own "letters" or add your own comments to the "Dear Coach" section by e-mailing them to . This "letter" is authored by Brent McLaren. Any and all opinions and interpretations are his own ... etc. etc. Thank you to the many umpires who have commented on the article and assisted in correcting the "finer points."
Dear Coach,
I sat and watched the game yesterday and have to tell you; you were right.
Let's review the game situation: There were two out, and you had a runner on first (R1). Your batter (BR) has just hit a bouncing looper to the third baseman (F5) who realizing there was no play at second has thrown to first base (F3). F5's throw went wide, all the way to the fence and you called R1 to go for third.
The right fielder retrieved the ball and threw across the diamond back to F5 but the pitcher smartly cut the ball off and tried to make a play at second base by throwing to the shortstop (F6). Your runner (BR) slide safely into the bag as the ball squirted into the field.
The final play occurred when the center fielder (F8) retrieved the ball and with R1 now going for home threw that mighty heave right over the cage out-of-play.
By every rule in baseball you were absolutely correct. Your runner, now at second, is awarded home as you correctly pointed out, "He should receive two bases from where he was at the time of the throw.". The umpire's ruling, based on the classic "one plus one" fairy tale was totally bogus and grounds for protest. His logic, that "he slid into second and therefore was not going to any base so he only gets one base" was a complete misinterpretation of the rules of baseball.
The next words from you should have been "Mr. Umpire, I respectfully protest your interpretation and application of the rules in this situation."
As an umpire, I invite you to protest
As an umpire I am not, and will never be, threatened by the word protest. Personally, I am aware that I can misapply the rules of baseball and so when a coach takes the opportunity to correct me it is not a threat, a problem or even a concern if I am overruled. Good umpires do not "even up." Good umpires learn from the challenges that are in front of them. I encourage you to discuss any rules application at any time and to protest my interpretation or application if you feel you must. By the way, I do keep a rule book handy at the diamond just in case one of these situations should occur.
Pro Rule 4.19 - Protests and Protestable calls
First, you are about to protest the game. What you are saying is that everything from this point on is not valid. If the protest is not immediately upheld the game can continue but make careful note of the exact point of the protest and all aspects of the game immediately before and after the protest, including the count on the batter.In many tournaments protests must be resolved before play can be resumed. In other games protests can be resolved after the game. Each league has a protest mechanism often including a very exacting time frame. Learn the protest system for your league or tournament.
Second, you cannot protest a judgment call. Judgment calls are defined in the rules and essentially are the out or safe, fair or foul, ball or strike, hit-by-pitch, balk variety of calls. Finally, more delicate and difficult is the umpire's call of interference or obstruction, or in some league's collision or failure-to-slide which are also judgment calls.
The game can only be protested when you believe a rule has not been applied correctly. Here you have to be very careful in framing your protest, particularly in the calls that cross boundaries between judgment and rules.
Let's clarify this a little more
It is important to differentiate the abstract concept of arguing a judgment as opposed to a ruling:If you both (coach and umpire) agree about what you saw happen, but disagree about the award/penalty, that's a ruling and it can be protested. If you both disagree about what you saw happen that's a judgment that cannot be protested. For example:
- Bases loaded, batted ball hits R2 while crossing to 3B. The umpire declares BR out, but allows R3 to score. Both coach and ump agree that ball hit R2, but disagree about allowing R3 to advance. This is a ruling.
- BR bunts the ball down the 3B line. No chalk lines are on the field. F2 touches the ball and you signal fair. His coach claims the ball looked foul to him. Coach and ump disagree about what they saw happen. This is a judgment call.
Some Examples ....
A recent example occurred like this: R1 and the batter hits deep into right field. R1 attempts to score but in doing so interferes with the catcher taking the throw from the fielder. R1 is out but the umpires allowed the batter to run to third base. This is incorrect and grounds for a protest."Mr. Umpire, I protest because on any interference the ball is dead and no runs may score or runners advance. The batter should be returned to first base since he had not arrived at second before the throw occurred." You cannot question the judgment on the interference, but you can see to redress the placement of the batter. Will the batter end up at first or second base? That is another test of the observation (and rules knowledge) of the umpires.
The same example, but in this case the batter is thrown out at third after the interference call. You say, "Mr. Umpire, I must protest your calling the runner out at third. On any interference the ball is dead and no runners may advance or be put out." Of course, you knew that on any interference the ball is really about to become dead (a delayed dead ball) and that the out at third will stand as part of the continuous play. Sorry, protest denied.
Here is an example where judgment and interpretation will collide: The batter bunts down the first base line, at least five feet in fair territory, and while running the last half of the way to first base is hit in the back by the throw from the catcher. The umpire calls the batter out. In your discussion the umpire tells you that, in his judgment, the batter was running on the baseline, not in the three foot lane, and because he was hit by the ball he is out. You ask, does he believe the runner intentionally interfered with the throw? The umpire say's no, the batter was just not completely in the three foot lane.
"Mr. Umpire, I must protest. The rules state that the runner must interfere with the throw and baseball has always interpreted this interference as intentional. There are numerous examples where batter-runners have been hit with by the throw, even in fair territory, and not been called out. You have stated that in your opinion there was no intent to interfere with the throw, in fact we agree that the catcher's throw was errant, well off the first baseman's target. To claim it is an out is to invite any catcher to simply throw at the runner in all similar situations. Therefore this cannot be considered an out."
As a coach you are now walking a fine line, protesting the interference call because you feel the umpire has not applied the proper intent and spirit of the rule in making a judgment call. Yes, you might be "working" an umpire to use a rules interpretation to question/argue (and maybe reverse) a call. In a critical game situation you must be able to calmly and quietly advance your case. Regardless, it is going to be a tough moment for all involved.
A tricky example
Game situation: R1, R3. The batter is squared to bunt and R3 is going to attempt to steal home on the pitch. The catcher jumps up, attempts to catch the ball and a collision occurs between the catcher and R3 at the plate. The ball rolls on the ground. R1 advances to third base. The plate umpire calls R3 out for interference then ejects him for unsportsmanlike conduct. (In many youth leagues "cruising" or intentional physical contact is grounds for ejection.)This is not going to be an easy protest, particularly if it goes before a committee. It will take a solid knowledge of the professional rules and the craft of a good lawyer to handle this one. You are virtually going to need a witness to this conversation.
First, break the play down into stages long before the collision.
- Was it a pitch or a throw? A pitch.
- Was the runner stealing home on the pitch? Yes.
- Did the batter interfere in anyway? No.
- Where was the catcher when he tried to catch the ball? He was straddling the plate.
- Did the catcher have possession of the ball when he first straddled the plate? No.
Here is what you do know and must concede ...
- Did the catcher have possession of the ball at the time of the collision? Yes, that is why the interference call, in the umpire's judgment the collision jarred the ball free.
- Did the runner slide or attempt to get around the catcher? In the umpire's judgment, no. This brought about the ejection.
Don't even discuss the possession or slide issue, that's judgment. Try something like this:
"Mr. Umpire, I respectfully protest your application and interpretation of the rules, particularly failing to apply professional rule 7.07 which requires you to charge a balk on the pitcher, score the run and award the batter first base on the interference by the catcher. As you have stated, the catcher clearly stepped in front of the plate, without the ball, to receive a pitch thus interfering with my batter on the play. As required by rule 7.07, charge the balk, score the run, place R1 at second base and the batter at first on the interference by the catcher."
If the umpire is not aware of this pro rule, and unless they work mainly senior baseball leagues surprisingly few are, let them go to their rule book.
Now for part two of your protest, "Mr. Umpire, I cannot accept the runner from third is ejected for his conduct. He had no way of anticipating the catcher would step in front of him and obstruct the plate in order to illegally receive the pitch. How can he be expected to slide when a fielder suddenly jumps in front of him to obstruct his base running? This is an expectation far beyond the abilities of any player, at best you have a simple collision not unsportsmanlike conduct."
The odds on keeping R3 in the game are not good but go for it anyway. Umpires are very reluctant to reverse themselves on ejections.
Before the next pitch or play
A protest must be made to the umpire-in-chief, the plate umpire, before the next pitch or play. Often the issue of continuous play figures into this equation. Remember, anytime play is ongoing you do not have to stop it in order to make a protest or appeal. Let the plays conclude then go forward.Unlike appeals, protests can be made during a dead ball and are usually made by the manager or coach of the team. Request time and come out for the discussion.
It will take a high level of rules understanding, a very calm head, and carefully developed communication skills to properly frame and win a protest. Bill Klem once said (paraphrased), "The rules were written by gentlemen for gentlemen, not lawyers for lawyer." Approach your protest with that in mind and you will stand a much better chance of coming out ahead after the situation. Good luck!
Still calling them as I see them,
... written August 25, 1997