Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2012 21:40:57 GMT 10
The Winter Baseball - Week Seventeen thread sparked discussion about washouts, which were an issue during last summer season and which have affected some of the winter competitions quite significantly.
Those who want to pick up on the discussion might like to do so here.
Washouts are a perennial issue that we didn’t have to bother too much about during fifteen years of drought. However, now that we are back to regular or above average rainfall patterns, the problem has resurfaced – as it did last summer.
I agree with stockley that we should always proceed on a “case by case” basis (not a blanket cancellation of all games when conditions seem poor), simply because of the variables that apply.
Some grounds are better drained than others. A few now have synthetic infields. Some clubs will do more effective mopping up work than others. Some clubs and some umpires might be more inclined to play or not play than others (in the case of a club, there could be concerns about playing a particular side on the ladder).
Importantly, most of the winter leagues cover a broad geographical area, with fluctuations in rainfall and ground capacity. The MWBL, for example, spreads from the west of the city, a fair distance north and as far east as Knox and Waverley. The GBA encompasses Geelong, Colac, Werribee, Ballarat and Bacchus Marsh. Latrobe Valley covers centres some reasonable distance apart.
Conditions may be far different from one ground to another, requiring that we suck it up, turn up and have a judgment made on the day, whether it might inconvenience us or not.
openeye’s concern over a binding definition of what makes a ground – or a game – unplayable is one that our administrators need to address. Winter and summer. Plenty of older blokes among us will recall playing in terrible conditions, in quagmires, that arguably may or may not have been safe. In that event, there was probably a general recognition that if we play baseball as a winter sport, then we should expect wintry conditions.
The trick is to decide when those conditions have affected a ground to the extent that it is causing danger to players or when the conditions simply make it impossible to play the game properly – for example, when an infield is under water or when the bases have floated away.
Until such time that jc and his philanthropic mates pay for domes over all grounds (and we thank jc for the sentiment), then we will have an imperfect system that we have to live with. In the meantime, baseball leagues (winter and summer) can consider these strategies among others:
Lobby councils for synthetic infields and more effective drainage (good luck with that).
Require that home clubs make every effort to get their grounds playable after significant rain events.
Do not abandon games unless it is absolutely necessary and unless there is a real risk of player injury.
Make provision in the draw for the rescheduling of games (especially getting towards finals). If a Saturday game is abandoned, for example, is it feasible to come back on the Sunday? Or even midweek if lighting is available.
Make provision in winter draws to play a few Saturday/Sunday doubleheaders at the start of the season so that we avoid the situation of some teams missing three, four or five games through washouts (as I expect some have in Vic Winter this year).
Structure winter competitions to ensure that all teams play a minimum of games for the season (say sixteen). Structure summer competitions to ensure that all teams play a minimum number of games by creating flexibility for reschedules.
We have lit grounds at Geelong, Ballarat, La Trobe and a revamped Altona. Surely we should aim to fully utilise those facilities twelve months of the year, including if necessary for rescheduling of rained-out games.
For example, if four games (eight clubs) were washed out on a particular Sunday, maybe reschedule those at Geelong synthetic or Ballarat synthetic for a Saturday to be negotiated.
The overwhelming majority of players pay for the privilege – for seniors, in the order of $ 250 - $ 300 for winter alone, aside from uniform, equipment and the social commitment. If we keep losing games through weather, then it makes it tough to justify the financial outlay.
We all want to see the game get better. And we all rightly expect value for money. We need to deal with this washout issue to achieve results on both fronts.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2012 22:49:28 GMT 10
KC - totally agree with your sentiments and observations.
But before we start thinking about alternatives to how we schedule 'catch up' games we need to sort out how we arrive at the decision to cancel a game in the first place. The decision should be based on measurable facts rather than opinion, experience and 'gut feelings'.
|
|
|
Post by The Puma on Aug 21, 2012 7:47:15 GMT 10
Gees KC, it's just winter baseball mate. Here we are trying to make the draw fair and reasonable for a local winter baseball league when the biggest game in the country can't even get it right.
I think if you start talking, make up games, mid weekers and double headers in winter you might find numbers thinning very fast.
|
|
|
Post by oldmanriver on Aug 21, 2012 8:31:10 GMT 10
I think the conditions of the grounds have a lot to do with the councils and the sometimes lack of assistance that certain councils give to the sport of Baseball. In our case at our Club we are prevented from putting in aggie pipes to help with the removal of surface water. But ever since the change over from Winter to Summer many moons ago, washouts have been with us whether we like it or not. There is provisions for clubs if they act quick enough to change grounds and then notify the various parties as to what is happening. A point was made that it is up to the individual club as to what extent they put into cleaning up the ground for play. An official umpire should have the power to oversee that some effort is put into preparing the ground if he has deemed the ground needing repairs as such. I am with Puma that make up games is not the wayto go. There is an answer, but it will need a lot a thought.
|
|
|
Post by lonewolf75 on Aug 21, 2012 9:09:50 GMT 10
KC, I agree with your sentiments but as a player the most frustrating thing is the perceived inconsistency in application of the rule/discission.
Wash outs due to rain will always come down to a judgment on the day and will be hard to set up some sort of bench mark. In my time these discissions to call off or not start games have been no brainers and have been implemented well, the problem will always be though, when a team is perceived to use a washout to get a point rather than risk a loss particularly in the lower grades where club umpires are the ones making the call.
As to grounds being unplayable, I have played on grounds this year and in the past that have been in worse condition than grounds that have been deemed unplayable. This is frustrating. I am a winter baller and I just want to play and some of these grounds, IMO have not been that bad. To add to this I have seen grounds that have been deemed unplayable for the early game, no work on the ground performed to improve its playability and then it be called playable in the late game. Trust me, this ground had not improved in two hours. I believe that in this case guide lines can and should be established and advised so that we as players are aware of them and to also help club umpires make discissions in the lower grades. I know umpires do enough already… but I also feel that this ground assessment should be done well before game time so that the club has an opportunity to improve the situation if possible. If an umpire says that a ground us unplayable half an hour before game time why cant they allow the clubs time to get the ground up to scratch so that at least 65 min game could be squeezed in. This has not happened this year and if they don’t think the ground could be improved I highly doubt it is going to be that much better for the late game. I also believe that the home should be expected to make a reasonable effort to get the ground playable if it is deemed possible by the umpires. Clubs should not be allowed to sit back and accept the draw if the want.
On the weekend I saw on here that in the MWBL there was a washout in B res game against Bundoora and FH, and then the Bundoora B grade forfeited. I would be intrigued to hear from Bundoora what was said to them by the umpire. Did they think that the umpire had called the ground unplayable for the day, did they assume that FH would not get the ground up to playable condition. Were Bundoora aware of what was required to get the ground playable? Had there been guidelines as to what was playable and what was not would the Bundoora guys have hung around and not suffered a forfeit.
I believe setting up some clear guidelines and procedures for the gameday decision should be the first and foremost discussion as at the moment it is very hit and miss. With everyone talking about duty of care it couldn’t be too hard to set up clear guidelines. No standing water on the basepaths/infield, mud in the outfield (I prefer a soggy outfield to muddy). I sure all us learned people on the forum could come up with things that would make ourselves think twice about playing and therefore set up some good guidelines.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2012 14:20:17 GMT 10
lonewolf75 - Basically we are on the same wavelength. But establishing 'guidelines' is not, IMO, good enough.
What is the definition of 'standing water'? How is it determined if the outfield is soggy or muddy? Does it make a difference if you have a muddy patch with no surface water or you have grass with water visible just below the top? How 'soggy' does it have to be?
Unless we are able to physically measure these situations in some way it will always be open to interpretation and therefore produce variable outcomes from one umpire to the next.
One point you make is a valid one. On wet days or days where games could be affected by ground conditions it would be desirable if umpires could get to the ground an hour or so prior to the start of the early game and make a ground inspection then. They could then point out what their particular concerns are and so allow the home team enough time to deal with them.
|
|
|
Post by The Jack on Aug 21, 2012 17:58:56 GMT 10
Make provision in the draw for the rescheduling of games (especially getting towards finals). If a Saturday game is abandoned, for example, is it feasible to come back on the Sunday? Or even midweek if lighting is available. I totally disagree with this statement KC, why should it matter if it is close to finals? Either all games are replayed/rescheduled or none. Just because the results of the top four are affected towards the end of the season is bad luck if none of the other rounds are replayed. Also, do we replay the D Grade round 17 game because finals depend on it or are we just talking about the top grade here? Wash outs suck, but we need to move on. Winter baseball, we get wet, we get muddy, we talk crap. If the game is called off before we get there because a ground is 'unplayable' so be it. If we get there and guys are trying to fix the ground and it rains and we are called off, so be it. I don't think we should be complaining that some are played and some aren't, because as KC said, the grounds we play on are not exactly next to each other and the rainfall will not be the same at each ground. Good luck to those that can get the games in because their grounds can hold the water or handle the conditions better than others. For other clubs, we need to continue doing our best to make our grounds as good as they can be. If that means that we get support from the local council great, if not, the old working bee may need to be attended by a few more individuals.
|
|
|
Post by eckersley43 on Aug 21, 2012 18:03:23 GMT 10
I agree with all of the above, but would add this point. Maybe infields and outfields should be viewed differently.I don't see how boggy outfields are inherently dangerous, but saw a match called for shallow pool of water in short rightfield when everywhere else was excellent. Are there any statistics on outfield injuries.I think boggy infields with hard hit balls, fielders trying to get a footing to throw without falling is somewhat different, plus runners on waterlogged base paths. A lot of the infields could be rectified with sand or en tout cas, but few clubs have "supplies" at the ground..maybe expense or council restrictions?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2012 18:44:57 GMT 10
You are right, TJ. The comment is not very well expressed.
The intent was not to imply that any game or any grade should be of greater importance than any other. However, it is at this time of the season (getting towards finals) that washouts cause more obvious concern for some clubs - IE those who have a chance of playing finals.
Midweek re-scheduling would not be appropriate for winter baseball during June/July/August (April/May would be OK), but I like the idea of having flexibility so that, for example, a Saturday washout could be played on the Sunday.
People accept that there will be occasional washouts in winter and summer. This winter the MWBL has seemed to experience more than is usual from my recollection. No one's fault. It has simply been a wet year.
If we are not going to reschedule games, then how many washouts do we deem to be acceptable before an already short season has its integrity compromised? Three, four, six?
While my playing days are done, I still reckon that we should make every effort to play every scheduled game if at all possible (even if, as someone mentioned, we strive to play just 65 minutes in less than ideal conditions).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2012 19:55:14 GMT 10
TJ has completely missed tthe point I'm tryimg to make. Whether games are replayed and how that would work is a totally different argument.
My concern is that the same criteria is used by each and every umpire to determine if the ground/game is unplayable. At the moment some games may be played and others not purely because one umpire sees things differently to another. If a team missed finals on that basis then they have every right to feel pi$$ed off.
|
|
|
Post by The Jack on Aug 21, 2012 21:00:59 GMT 10
TJ has completely missed tthe point I'm tryimg to make. Don't recall commenting on your post, didn't quote you until now, but here goes... Instead of feeling upset (or worse) because a game has been washed out late in the season, how about we look at the games 'that got away'. One loss or washout does not cost you finals, rather all of the losses put together. Lets look at the MWBL A and B Grades, In A Grade, Knox has played in drawn games which will likely cost them a spot in the finals, not the washouts (although yes they don't help either), picking up 2 wins out of their draws would have them sitting 4th. In B Grade 2nd and 3rd have won less games than 4th, 5th has won 2 less than 4th, so again the 5th team would need to look at games it lost or drew as where their season went wrong, not the 1 wash out they have had so far. Don't get me wrong, I would love to play a full season, but saying that finals are the result of washouts is a bit of a cop out as winning more games would get you into the finals. Take the weather out of it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2012 21:18:00 GMT 10
TJ, let us also look at one instance that did not get away.
In the GBA last weekend, Guild had a home game against Ballarat Brewers. The weather was crap, like everywhere else in the state. Both clubs needed to win the game (Guild to retain second, the Brewers to have a shot of making the four).
Yes, the Geelong Baseball Centre is a great facility that is well-drained and holds up very well in weather. Nevertheless, the Guild club was on social media and on the phone from early Saturday, urging its members and supporters to turn up and help get the ground game ready.
As I was heading down there I had my doubts if the game would proceed given the volume of rainfall. Wrong. Aside from some water in the sunken dugouts, the ground looked magnificent and it played accordingly.
It was a credit to the club members who were committed to getting a game played. It cannot always be done of course, though I could not help but think there was a message in there somewhere (even though the good guys lost the game).
Yes, winning more games always gives you a better chance of making finals. Helping to enable more games to be played gives a better chance of winning more, with the consequences that can flow from that. That is one of the reasons why I have never favoured a blanket cancellation of league games.
openeye, you are correct in identifying two separate although related issues here – the actual decision to call games because of playing conditions and the response of governing bodies regarding any potential reschedule.
Whether we agree with the guidelines or not, Baseball Victoria has specific requirements in regard to its heat and its lightning policy for summer baseball. It follows that having a set of consistent standards or measurements to be applied when determining whether a game should be declared a washout or not might work. In theory, anyhow.
Temperatures and the evidence of lightning in an area are measurable. I don’t know that we can as readily quantify the level (and the significance) of surface water and the bogginess of outfields. The level of surface water could change quite quickly depending on drainage and on mopping-up work. Does a boggy outfield pose a real risk to players? Does playing in light to moderate rain pose a real risk to players (especially if there are ample match balls that are kept reasonably dry)?
Under any prescriptive guidelines that could be formulated, at what point would they be applied? Two hours before a game? An hour before a game? Or would umpires be able to delay the starting time in order to reassess the conditions (as has happened with the heat policy)?
What if there is no official umpire, or umpires? Who makes the call? Club officials, presumably, or team managers. What if they disagree? What if they agree, but choose to call the game, or to play the game anyhow, for their own reasons? Would they have to record details of the ground conditions and forward to their association as a report?
Unfavourable weather this winter has brought the washout issue into focus. Some, or most winter leagues have an interest in this Forum and would be well-advised to reconsider or to devise strategies for more effectively dealing with what is likely to be happening even more often into the future – winter and summer - if we accept climate change as a reality.
There is no easy answer, though this thread has already got the discussion going.
Finally, though it obviously does not apply to the winter leagues and it might best be dealt with elsewhere, I think it is time that the Heat Policy for summer is placed under scrutiny. At least for senior baseball, and arguably for juniors as well.
For a two and a half-hour game, a player might spend a half of that on the field. Wearing a cap, for lengthy periods not involved directly in the action (other than pitcher and catcher), having the opportunity to rehydrate regularly and being involved in minimal explosive activity (such as baserunning) surely does not physically challenge a reasonably fit and healthy person all that much.
Baseball is a stop and start sport, with ample recovery time. It is not like running a marathon. It is not like being in the field, or bowling all day playing cricket. Do we seriously need a Heat Policy or has this “duty of care” concept gone too far?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2012 7:34:28 GMT 10
TJ I was going to let your comments slide but I was curious about what you said regarding Knox and their draws.
Of their six draws, five have been nil all results, coincidently the same result that is attributed to a washout. Now maybe they did play out nil all draws but .....
I see also that GMBC have had five nil all results. Draws or washouts?
I don't recall saying that I was upset (or worse) about a game being washed out. Nor did I say that the finals are a result of washouts. But in an 18 round season, 5+ games is a fair chunk to lose to washouts. It would be next to impossible for teams not to be affected. You actually have to play the game before you can win it.
Of course winter baseball is going to be affected by weather. What I'm saying is that the reason for cancelling a game should be based on facts not opinion. Sometimes those facts are obvious eg. pouring rain - other times not so obvious. Can we at least try to get it right?
|
|
|
Post by The Puma on Aug 22, 2012 8:20:29 GMT 10
openeye, you keep saying it need to be fixed and there should be uniform standards for washouts but your yet to put forward and ideas. Do you actually have any?
|
|
|
Post by stockley on Aug 22, 2012 9:06:59 GMT 10
KC, re the heat policy, I think its a fair stretch to suggest that everybody playing baseball and affected by the heat policy is "a reasonably fit and healthy person".
The policy applies to all levels of seniors, and unless you're suggesting a policy for 1sts and then a policy for everyone else, how do you distinguish?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2012 9:52:23 GMT 10
By virtue of the fact that they are playing a team sport, we can deem people as "reasonably fit and healthy". Sport-fit, that is - not necessarily athletes. One of the great attractions of the sport is that it can accommodate an entire range of fitness levels.
There will be people who have health issues - asthma for example - that may have to managed. But those issues have to be managed in any event, not specifically because of an arbitrary measurement on temperature.
|
|
|
Post by smallchange on Aug 22, 2012 9:56:19 GMT 10
i agree with openeye that there needs to be consistency, but it is impractical (if not impossible) to make the assessment purely factual and without resort to opinion - impractical because there would be different standards for different age groups and the amount of testing would be overly time intensive). Also the decision whether to play or not is based partly on whether the risk of injury is acceptable - an opinion not a fact. The opinion, however, should be formed based upon agreed guidelines. Umpire's opinion currently do vary widely. The ABF or BUAV should set some guidelines (hopefully in consultation with the clubs), educate umpires about them and also managers and players so that clubs have the best chance to address issues with a ground on any given weekend
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2012 10:07:23 GMT 10
openeye, you keep saying it need to be fixed and there should be uniform standards for washouts but your yet to put forward and ideas. Do you actually have any? Do you?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2012 10:15:22 GMT 10
i agree with openeye that there needs to be consistency, but it is impractical (if not impossible) to make the assessment purely factual and without resort to opinion - impractical because there would be different standards for different age groups and the amount of testing would be overly time intensive)...... Not sure about that. For example, I believe (could be mistaken) that horse racing clubs use some sort of device to measure the hardness/softness of the track. Not suggesting that is the answer but they have come up with something they are happy with. Also, the standard should be the same for all age groups because they are all at risk from bad playing conditions.
|
|
|
Post by The Puma on Aug 22, 2012 10:48:41 GMT 10
openeye, you keep saying it need to be fixed and there should be uniform standards for washouts but your yet to put forward and ideas. Do you actually have any? Do you? Nup, but I'm not the one banging on about it.
|
|
|
Post by smallchange on Aug 22, 2012 10:49:24 GMT 10
sure, but in horseracing (presumably) if any part of the track is too hard or soft then there can't be a race. so you test a few spots and if any don't come up then you water the track or cancel. in baseball for example, a muddy strip down from the mound is potentially more dangerous than the same depth of mud at back of right field. so you will often have to test just about every part of the ground with different criteria for each. add to that 1 square foot of mud on a running track is different to say 16 square feet at shortstop and you have another lot of measurements that need to be taken.
not to say that testing couldn't be used, i just don't think it will ever be the "be all and end all" - opinions will still enter into the assessment.
re age groups: the duty of care is increased for minors so arguably grounds need to be in better shape for them.
i think we can all agree that plenty of people want something to be done about consistency of calls on ground conditions. the powers that be should follow this discussion up
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2012 12:27:10 GMT 10
Baseball Victoria has a lightning policy. From memory it was applied on occasions during the past two seasons. While we might debate specific requirements of the policy, no person in their right mind would advocate playing on during a lightning strike.
There is a clear and immediate danger. And there is thereby a duty of care.
I sometimes think, though, that this duty of care we keep banging on about is overstated in some other areas and that it arises largely from a fear of litigation when we should be more mindful of other priorities.
How many baseball clubs have a defibrillator on site? And a person trained in its use? How many clubs have qualified first-aid personnel on site during games and at training sessions? Of those, how many know how to properly deal with a spinal injury, head trauma, stroke or heart attack in the crucial time before an ambulance can attend?
In order, I’d hazard some guesses. Bugger all. Maybe. Sometimes. Dunno.
Baseball administrators have seemingly not yet figured out that this is where the serious “duty of care” applies. Having the capacity to respond to an emergency in a sport where we place ourselves at risk every time we pick up a bat or ball. There, and in ensuring that juniors and commencing players are consistently educated in taking care of their well-being in extreme weather conditions – including winter.
If we play a summer sport, we should expect hot days. If we play a winter sport, we should expect that it will often be cold and wet. As individuals, should we not accept some personal responsibility for how we adjust to the conditions?
Sometimes it is simply not possible to play baseball (if it is bucketing down or if a ground is under water), though it seems to me that we are too often finding ways to stop people playing - under the guise of “duty of care”.
Apart from the obvious occasions that play is not possible, the only criterion that should be applied in making a decision on not playing a game is safety. If it is accepted that there is a clear and immediate danger to players, then the game should be delayed, rescheduled or abandoned.
Whether we agree or disagree with a heat policy, at least it sets a benchmark that takes the decision out of the hands of individuals. If the correct procedures are followed. This discussion shows how difficult it would be for administrators to come up with a workable benchmark for abandoning games – especially during winter, when grounds are under continuous stress.
In view of widespread washouts in most leagues this winter, it is appropriate - despite the challenges - for administrators to formulate some consistent guidelines and at least consider some strategies to ensure that scheduled games are played if at all possible.
Even more than that, this discussion raises the broader issue of the capacity of clubs to respond effectively to an emergency.
|
|
|
Post by oldmanriver on Aug 22, 2012 12:59:19 GMT 10
Very well put together KC. You have head the nail on the head. Perhaps you should be running BV with clear thinking like you just displayed. There are more important issues other than washouts.
|
|
|
Post by wyatt33 on Aug 22, 2012 15:11:25 GMT 10
Lightning policy! Who said lightning policy!?
|
|