Summer Week One

[ayresy]

Opening day for the Demons was at Waverley. In gusty conditions it was a pretty good contest. Bristien started for us and Wilson for them. We got on the board early when Adam Burton hit a 2 run shot to left.

We had the lead all day finishing up 9-4. Pretty good all round effort especially from a few of our young guys who got their first start in div 1.

[stuartcapel]

Glad I hit refresh before creating a new thread when you did.

Springvale and Cheltenham finished tied at eight, with the game called for darkness in the ninth innings.

Cheltenham had gone ahead in the ninth, but after a HBP with the first pitch in the bottom of the ninth, the umpires got together and the HBP ended up being the final pitch of the game.

Cheltenham won the seconds, while Springvale won the thirds on a walk-off balk 1-0 in the seventh innings. Springvale won the fourths, while Springvale's Division Four side defeated Berwick.

[Deleted]

Looks like all but a couple of the senior games scheduled for Melbourne and surrounds were played.

Not so in Ballarat, where the Division Two firsts game between the Brewers and Malvern was called without a pitch being thrown. Drizzle only at the start, though the umpiring call was shown to be correct as it was bucketing down by a point that would have been 45 minutes to an hour into the contest.

A couple of questions for you wise Forum followers out there.

Is it true that the lit club grounds (Ballarat, Preston and Geelong) are not allowed to turn on lights for home games? And if so, why? Lights exist to create light, do they not? My sense is that they are there be be used (when necessary, preferably before a game has started and as long as no disadvantage is created for either team), regardless of what is happening at other fields.

Is it true that Summer League umpires are directed to not start any game in drizzle? If so, what is the point of having all-surface fields?

I am not taking a shot at anyone here. Not at all. I just feel that there should be clarification over lighting and synthetic field issues when increasingly more grounds are going to be upgraded to that status over time. The reason for having better surfaces and gameday lighting is surely to facilitate more play, at more times of day, in demonstrably safer conditions.

And yes, this Forum has been quiet leading into the Summer League season. I can be corrected if wrong, though it seems there is interest in keeping the service available.

[fuzzy]

Sandy 6-1 over Newport, imports very good for both teams, all runs scored in the 9th. Sandy up in the 2nds and 3rds, Newport won the 4ths 4-1 with a walkoff grand slam.

[Camov]

Werribee too good for the wolves today. up 7-2.

With the wind howling in from leftfield Weribee played the conditions better. plating 5 runs in the first 3 innings with some timely knocks to right field.
Werribee's import was strong through 5 (or 6) not letting a runner past second base and inducing 3 double plays. Josh lee closed the game out well.

[p8]

Hi KC
My understanding is that lights are able to be used at grounds that have them. The intent is to try and get games in where you can, regardless of what is happening at other fields.

It is my understanding that Summer League umpires will not commence a game if it is raining or drizzling. I believe that this has been the practice back as far as when Barry Smith was Director of Umpiring; so even before all-surface fields.
Bear in mind that the state of the ground is only one aspect, Summer League does not use wet weather balls so balls can and do become slippery, rain affecting the batter or fielder and players wearing glasses are just some of the considerations for duty of care. Who wants to be standing in left field for a long innings and getting saturated is not funny, especially at Ballarat (LOL).

[Deleted]

Duty of care should always be paramount, p8, as you rightly say. The umpires in this case made the demonstrably correct call in not starting the game when conditions appeared unlikely to improve (and subsequently did not improve).

I agree that state of the ground is just one factor, but the state of the state of some surfaces is a moot point, if you get my drift. As a player I would feel somewhat more at ease (and more likely to be eligible for insurance cover) if I was playing on a synthetic field under drizzling conditions than under blue skies on a shifting surface with poor traction underfoot. The latter scenario can be far more dangerous.

While we should all have confidence in our officials to properly decide on whether play will proceed in drizzle, that other issue of lighting needs to be clarified and mandated given the misunderstandings that appear to exist among some clubs.

The issue was raised by some players at Ballarat today (before rain became the main factor). There were differing views expressed by various people. I seem to recall a similar discussion about the Preston and Geelong grounds in past seasons.

I would have thought the commonsense way to go, when there was any prospect of a light issue, would be to allow the home club to simply flick a switch in ample time before the game was due to start.

[MF]

FWIW, I watched the Red Sox/Blue Jays game on Saturday via MLB.tv with the pretty much the entire game played from the first pitch in noticeable rain.

(Of course, while they don't use wet weather balls either, they do replace them just about every other pitch.)

[p8]

KC
I am fairly confident that where lights are available then they can be used where there is a light issue. However once a game starts then the decision as to whether to turn them on belongs solely to the umpire in chief.

[wako]

Oct 2, 2016 19:52:09 GMT 10 kc said:

Is it true that the lit club grounds (Ballarat, Preston and Geelong) are not allowed to turn on lights for home games? And if so, why? Lights exist to create light, do they not? My sense is that they are there be be used (when necessary, preferably before a game has started and as long as no disadvantage is created for either team), regardless of what is happening at other fields.

I should d**n well hope not, as Geelong have a home game fixtured against Newport at 6PM Sat 15th October...

[Deleted]

A scheduled night game is obviously just that, wako. The concern relates to normally scheduled day games.

There has been a perception held by some people that lights cannot be used for those normally scheduled day games because it would provide some sort of advantage over teams at unlit grounds when light was a factor (IE games at lit grounds could proceed while other games might be called because of light).

It seems that perception is misguided. Commonsense says that it would be a stupid rule. But this should be clarified, because it is a perception that must have come from somewhere.

There currently seems to be nothing in BV By-Laws regarding the use of lights during scheduled day games. So I guess in the absence of anything to the contrary, p8 is quite correct. Clubs and umpires should simply use their discretion and do what they feel is best to allow the game to proceed safely (IE turn on the lights if deemed appropriate).