Baseball

I'm not sure there is any rule....at least at a national level.  It's HS, it's typically up to the coaches who plays when/where/how much. Was the kid ineligible for some reason (grades, transfer, etc).  If so, I'd expect him to play when he's eligible...assuming he's got the talent to take a position from someone who has been on the field.   HS ball isn't rec or Little League.  It's not always fair.  Without knowing more about why this kid is showing up now, it's tough to give any more info than that.  Typcially in HS, the best players play if they are able.

In Texas, none.

There is no "fair." Fair is a word used by lazy people and teenagers. Be better than him and it's a moot point.

Dan1122 posted:

How many practices are required for a high school baseball player to be eligible to play in games? I know a player that is trying to start practicing this week and still wants to play this season. Not really fair to the other players that have been there since day one.

That would depend on the situation and why he hasn't been practicing in the past.  Although, I wouldn't think there is a specific rule (NFHS) that can be referred to if that's what you are looking for.  All HS coaches and Athletic Directors have thier own guide lines in that respect. 

Dan1122 posted:

Player did not want to play but was put on roster due to assistant coach having a personal relationship with the player. Finally pushed him into playing. Fair is putting the best players on the field that is not what is happening here.

So that's a TOTALLY different scenario than your OP.  You're real question is whether a less talented player (in your opinion) should play ahead of a more talented player and whether its fair if that occurs.

Much like the other posters, fair isn't even in the realm of discussion.  As for the assessment of talent, that's subjective and perhaps the coach disagrees with you.  It may also be more of a positional need, or perhaps this kid may be playing ahead of has grade or attitude issues of which you're not aware.  If it's your son that is losing playing time, I certainly get why you feel the way you do, but I also caution that your perspective may or may not be accurate and that the best thing the player losing out to this one can do is work his but off in every facet of the classroom and field so that the answer is undeniable to the coach that he should be playing.

How many games are even left in the season?  There can't be many so what's the point?

As for the rule the NFHS does not touch this and it's left up to each state to determine how many or even if you need to attend X number of practices to be eligible.  Overall the only sport that requires a mandatory number of practices is football and that's to acclimate bodies to the heat, equipment and physical toll on the body before playing.  Even if a kid comes out late they still must get 10 days in before playing in a game (in NC that is).  I don't know the rule for every state but I would guess it's the same or very similar to this.  I would seriously doubt there is a state that doesn't have a number of practices before play rule.  But I only know this for football and no other sport.  So theoretically someone could decide to play Tuesday morning and play Tuesday night.

Unless there is more info that would be helpful I think this is wrong and this kid shouldn't be allowed to play no matter how good he is.  If there is only about a 1/3 of the season left and he didn't want to play at the start then I've moved on.  He can come out next year and earn a spot then.  I get the whole best 9 play and I totally believe that.  I also believe the coach determines lines up based on what he thinks is best for the team.  End of the day this isn't pro ball where nothing else matters except for winning and people lose their jobs if they don't win.  This is HS baseball and so many other things matter more than winning at any cost.  You do things like this you will find that you will lose the team and don't be surprised if guys start quitting / not try out the next year.  Now that's a problem too in not realizing you want to play you have to work and quitting is making you a quitter but that is what will happen.  As an AD I'm going to have a serious talk with the coach about if he really wants to do this or not.  

Dan1122 posted:

 Fair is putting the best players on the field that is not what is happening here.

There is no "fair." Fair is a word used by lazy people and teenagers.

How old are you?

Unfortunately, on this board, high school coaches get way too much credit for being impartial arbiters of talent.

In my book, if you don't try out or you leave the team after you try out...then you are done and no longer on the roster...end of story (unless there are some extreme extenuating circumstances such as injury, personal/family issues).

ironhorse posted:

Dan1122 posted:

 Fair is putting the best players on the field that is not what is happening here.

There is no "fair." Fair is a word used by lazy people and teenagers.

How old are you?

"Fare is what you pay when you get on the bus."  An old timey quote that I say to kids and they have no idea what I'm talking about.  

"Dad, You mean Uber?"

Buzzard05 posted:

Unfortunately, on this board, high school coaches get way too much credit for being impartial arbiters of talent.

Haha. That's crazy. You may want to search a little more. 

Buzzard05 posted:

In my book, if you don't try out or you leave the team after you try out...then you are done and no longer on the roster...end of story (unless there are some extreme extenuating circumstances such as injury, personal/family issues).

Exactly.

"Fare is what you pay when you get on the bus."  An old timey quote that I say to kids and they have no idea what I'm talking about.  

"Dad, You mean Uber?"

This is sad.  Maybe we should start another thread about all the old sayings that seem to have zero relevance to kids these days.  Something like "That and 50 cents will get you a cup of coffee" - maybe this needs to be reworked around a Starbucks theme - "That and $3.50 will get you a half caff" or something.

I'm familiar with a player who chose not to play in the spring, who was approached by a coach to see if he would be interested in joining the team as it approached its playoff run. Said player would have bumped a kid that had practiced all season off of the 20 man maximum playoff roster. 

To some, doing whatever you can within the rules to put your team in the position to win is "fair" to the team - even though it is often not what seems "fair" to an individual player.

2017LHPscrewball posted:

"Fare is what you pay when you get on the bus."  An old timey quote that I say to kids and they have no idea what I'm talking about.  

"Dad, You mean Uber?"

This is sad.  Maybe we should start another thread about all the old sayings that seem to have zero relevance to kids these days.  Something like "That and 50 cents will get you a cup of coffee" - maybe this needs to be reworked around a Starbucks theme - "That and $3.50 will get you a half caff" or something.

Funny point you make.  

Several years ago (elementary school, young rec ball years), we were heading home around 9:00 pm after a weeknight game. I begin to say "as soon as we get home . . . " and he cuts me off with the "I know, I know, shower and bed".  I replied that I must sound like a broken record.

The rest of the drive home was me explaining what a record was and how they got scratched and skipped.  Had to use Sponge Bob as a point of reference on what a record player is since they actually have one on the show.

Well, this certainly leaves a lot to be curious about.  Dan, what was this player doing up until recently?  Playing another sport?  Nothing?  How many coaches are on the staff?  Why do you suppose they collectively agreed to have this player join the team?  Even if an assistant coach was in this player's corner, don't you think the HC would have to also see that this player could help the team?  Is this player coming in and starting right away?  Why is it that you think this player is playing above a better player?  Do you think that a collective staff that spends several hours a day with players for several months just working on and evaluating baseball skills is making a less informed judgement call than a parent?  If the HC and any other coaches don't already know or have not seen enough of this player to make a fair evaluation, would they really put him right in the lineup?  Maybe I am mis-interpreting your comment "Fair is putting the best players on the field that is not what is happening here."

Rob T posted:

I'm familiar with a player who chose not to play in the spring, who was approached by a coach to see if he would be interested in joining the team as it approached its playoff run. Said player would have bumped a kid that had practiced all season off of the 20 man maximum playoff roster. 

To some, doing whatever you can within the rules to put your team in the position to win is "fair" to the team - even though it is often not what seems "fair" to an individual player.

In my opinion that sounds like a shortsighted strategy.  Based on the scenario you described, how could any of the teammates trust this player.  Baseball is a team sport; and team chemistry is, in my opinion, a vital part of a winning team's character.  This move certainly wouldn't improve team chemistry, and it might very well degrade team morale.

How could the coach tell the rest of his players to make every practice, or run out every fly ball, or earn your team's trust through hard work...when he allows one player to play without doing those things.  A move like that would leave me shaking my head...not because it isn't fair, but because it isn't smart.

A lot of good questions here.....but I guess at this point, since we still have no idea why he showed up at this point, I think there are all valid.  Here in Ohio, if you transfer without moving, you have to sit out a half a season.  I'm not sure if you can practice or not.  If the kid is attending the school and just became eligible, I have no problem with him playing.  Same scenario with a kid coming off an injury or moving into the district.  If he wasn't going to play and just decided now that he wants to, that's a different story....though again, there's got to be more than this than has been listed here.

jdb posted:

Rob T posted:

I'm familiar with a player who chose not to play in the spring, who was approached by a coach to see if he would be interested in joining the team as it approached its playoff run. Said player would have bumped a kid that had practiced all season off of the 20 man maximum playoff roster. 

To some, doing whatever you can within the rules to put your team in the position to win is "fair" to the team - even though it is often not what seems "fair" to an individual player.

In my opinion that sounds like a shortsighted strategy.  Based on the scenario you described, how could any of the teammates trust this player.  Baseball is a team sport; and team chemistry is, in my opinion, a vital part of a winning team's character.  This move certainly wouldn't improve team chemistry, and it might very well degrade team morale.

How could the coach tell the rest of his players to make every practice, or run out every fly ball, or earn your team's trust through hard work...when he allows one player to play without doing those things.  A move like that would leave me shaking my head...not because it isn't fair, but because it isn't smart.

I agree, and so did the player in question.  My observation was more along the lines of how winning usually trumps "fair" when a job is on the line.

Unless he is trying to make a point, a coach is always going to put the players on the field that he thinks give the team the best chance of winning.  Of course the coach has to be careful of how many "points" he chooses to make - because if the "points" on the scoreboard don't end up in his favor, he may get "pointed" to the door.

JDB-

I can agree with it not being smart, but I'll admit we don't know the whole story at all. 

I had the same situation this year. A starter quit in the fall and missed all of offseason when we put in the hardest work. Came in 2nd semester and said he changed his mind and wanted to play. He would have made us better, but the coaching staff would have lost credibility. 

We said no. Not because it was or wasn't fair, but because it wasn't best for the program overall. But again, I know all the details in my story, but not the one above.

This happened at our high school this year, mid season.  Senior basketball player who quit playing baseball for basketball as a freshman, who saw the baseball team doing well and talked to his two best friends, senior team captains about playing baseball again.  The seniors captains approached the coach, who deferred to a senior vote.  Captains called an emergency senior meeting to make the decision.  The two senior captains were the only two who voted in favor of bringing on the new player.  Almost all of the kids involved played for the coach in LL and travel (except for two). I'm guessing this is why the coach deferred.  I think the issue turned out correctly, but can not believe how the decision transpired.  It should not matter who the player is or who you know.  If you did not try out at the beginning, you don't play.

Rob T posted:

jdb posted:

Rob T posted:

I'm familiar with a player who chose not to play in the spring, who was approached by a coach to see if he would be interested in joining the team as it approached its playoff run. Said player would have bumped a kid that had practiced all season off of the 20 man maximum playoff roster. 

To some, doing whatever you can within the rules to put your team in the position to win is "fair" to the team - even though it is often not what seems "fair" to an individual player.

In my opinion that sounds like a shortsighted strategy.  Based on the scenario you described, how could any of the teammates trust this player.  Baseball is a team sport; and team chemistry is, in my opinion, a vital part of a winning team's character.  This move certainly wouldn't improve team chemistry, and it might very well degrade team morale.

How could the coach tell the rest of his players to make every practice, or run out every fly ball, or earn your team's trust through hard work...when he allows one player to play without doing those things.  A move like that would leave me shaking my head...not because it isn't fair, but because it isn't smart.

I agree, and so did the player in question.  My observation was more along the lines of how winning usually trumps "fair" when a job is on the line.

Unless he is trying to make a point, a coach is always going to put the players on the field that he thinks give the team the best chance of winning.  Of course the coach has to be careful of how many "points" he chooses to make - because if the "points" on the scoreboard don't end up in his favor, he may get "pointed" to the door.

Hey RobT: I'm not trying to nit pick, but most good coaches try and put the best team on the field, which is not necessarily the best individual players.  We've all heard the stories of a coach telling the "best player" on the team, "Don't let the door hit you in the butt on your way out," because the kid was a knucklehead.  It is also pretty common for players to get benched during the year for infractions of one kind or another.  That's not to say the 90 mph, D1 prospect isn't going to get more leeway than the marginal player, but all players have a line that makes them a burden rather than an asset.

Ironhorse: You wrote, "He would have made us better, but the coaching staff would have lost credibility...We said no."  I think that that is smart coaching.  I also think that there are some HS coaches who, given the same situation, would have brought the kid back.  They then would have told the team, "This is my decision, live with it."  In my opinion, not smart coaching.

In NY you need to submit pre-participation forms and have to attend (and participate) xx number of practices before you play in a game.  The rule applies to all of the sports as far as I know.  I know the rule first hand as it was applied to my middle school son for football (we forgot about the pre-participation form) and it just happened to a top level prospect for a neighboring school - the paperwork was not filed and he played in their first two games (which they won).  When the error was discovered by the school those two games were forfeited and the player had to sit out until he had been to enough practices to be eligible.   I'm sure it's different in each state - but in NY the player you are talking about wouldn't be eligible to play until those forms were in and he had xx practices under his belt.  That sounds like the question you are asking.  If he started today in this region, he wouldn't have many regular season games left once he had been cleared.  

When my son was in high school a previous two year starter was ineligible to try out for baseball. Tryouts fell on the calendar during his 90 day activity suspension for drinking. The coach allowed him to have a personal tryout after the suspension.

The team was in first. The coach told the kid all making the team was getting him was a roster spot. Don't expect anything more. His tryout was really nothing more than practicing for a day with a team and being handed a uniform. The kid no showed. He didn't want to sit after starting for two years. He still went on to play D3 ball.

Every starter on the team made some level of all conference. The coach wasn't going to shake up a team with a new starter who hadn't been with the team half the season. A majority of the team wasn't on varsity and a teammate of the kid the previous year.

It's not always black and white.  We also had a situation this year...

Senior player, played another winter sport, failed to show for baseball conditioning once eligible, decided to quit and focus on other sport (other real reasons may vary) for a shot at college ball.  He was a valuable contributor the previous year as one of two primary rotation guys.  As HC, I had my one conversation with him to make sure he was making the decision based on the right things.  Then I let it go.  

Then, several adults in his life (past coaches, other sport coaches, etc. ) kept convincing him he was making a mistake, he would regret it, he had a better shot at a college career as a P, etc., etc.  He came around about three weeks prior to season start, asking, respectfully, for an opportunity to re-join us.  I consulted with a few team leaders who had mixed feelings but recognized he could help this very young team, ultimately giving the "yes" vote.  I set clear expectations that he would have to re-earn his way to his former position.  I demanded more from him than he had given in the past.  I suspected that his return was influenced by others more than him actually wanting to play again, so I did not expect it to last.  

There were many factors in deciding to allow him back.  Some of you would not agree with all of them.  For example, I do not feel it is my job as a HS HC to deny opportunities for HS athletes to participate.  Yes, I have to cut players due to number limits and relative skill/ability level, designate to JV, bench, etc., but he had done nothing wrong except decide not to participate based on how he felt and then listen to advice of adults and change his mind.  What?  a 17 y.o. change his mind?  He had participated in the program the previous three years and, while not always a perfect model citizen, followed the basic rules of the program.  

Some other parents and coaches were not happy with my decision.  In the end, he could not hold up to his end of the bargain and we parted ways.  Ultimately, I think the team is stronger because they dealt with the issue, realized there will always be someone pushing to take their spot, saw that even though he added proven and needed talent, he had to start from square one and earn his way back in and was not guaranteed anything.  It made the rest of the team rally around each other and work all the harder... a process I suspected would evolve pretty much the way it did.  Not at all what others thought I was thinking.  Another separate factor was that I also had cause to respect the opinion and recommended direction to the player of some of the adults who were advocating for him to come back.  

So, a whole lot going on behind the scenes that most are not aware of.  I could tell twenty more similar drama stories from this year alone where parents (and often, players) have no idea what is happening behind the scenes and don't understand why moves are being made.  Often, they voice their disapproval to others and would be quite embarrassed if they knew the whole story.  My point here?  Parents should encourage their players to just be the best player they can be and not get caught up in all the other stuff.  Support the team and all the other players in general.  You don't know what is behind most of what is going on.  As Ironhorse said in far fewer words...  "be better than him and it's a moot point".

Dan1122 posted:

Player did not want to play but was put on roster due to assistant coach having a personal relationship with the player. The player played last season and was an average situational outfielder. The player did not want to play because he told many people it was too much time and he really only liked basketball anyway. He had other things to do. He did not come to winter workouts or the tryouts. He has not touched his glove since May 2015. It does not effect my son. He is a senior multiple year starter and has a scholarship to play college baseball next season. I have been asked by multiple parents and players if this can be done because it angered quit a few people. I know there are rules for minimum practice amount per sport. I thought someone may information. 

Mom must be pretty hot. 

This rule only exists in football:

>1901.  FOOTBALL PRACTICE DAYS; NO SUNDAY PRACTICE    A. There shall be no football games until the squad has had 14 days of practice before the first game. Each individual student on the  team must have had at least 10 days of practice before being allowed to compete in a game. (The opening date of football  practice may be determined by each Section.)  No Sunday practice is permitted. (See Bylaw 504.M for exception.)    

ironhorse posted:

In Texas, none.

There is no "fair." Fair is a word used by lazy people and teenagers. Be better than him and it's a moot point.

 

Try beating out the coaches 5'-6" son at shortstop in high school.  Never happened in the 4 yrs that kid played Varsity shortstop.  And no, the kid was not a Varsity level shortstop.  

Sometimes life isn't fair.  I see it in all walks of my life.  Best thing to do is not worry about what you can't change. 

Said the guy complaining about playing time to strangers on the internet.....

I'm not sure the cause is worth getting in the middle for. It doesn't affect your son. That is until the coaching staff hears you discussing it an having an opinion.

Dan1122 posted:

Player did not want to play but was put on roster due to assistant coach having a personal relationship with the player. The player played last season and was an average situational outfielder. The player did not want to play because he told many people it was too much time and he really only liked basketball anyway. He had other things to do. He did not come to winter workouts or the tryouts. He has not touched his glove since May 2015. It does not effect my son. He is a senior multiple year starter and has a scholarship to play college baseball next season. I have been asked by multiple parents and players if this can be done because it angered quit a few people. I know there are rules for minimum practice amount per sport. I thought someone may information. 

So, then, can you expand on why you think he was brought on?  Is he playing or is it too early to know?  Maybe provide answers to questions from my first post?...

"Dan, what was this player doing up until recently?  Playing another sport?  Nothing?  How many coaches are on the staff?  Why do you suppose they collectively agreed to have this player join the team?  Even if an assistant coach was in this player's corner, don't you think the HC would have to also see that this player could help the team?  Is this player coming in and starting right away?  Why is it that you think this player is playing above a better player?  Do you think that a collective staff that spends several hours a day with players for several months just working on and evaluating baseball skills is making a less informed judgement call than a parent?  If the HC and any other coaches don't already know or have not seen enough of this player to make a fair evaluation, would they really put him right in the lineup?"

I realize that the intent of your OP was to determine what rules apply but I think some of us are certainly curious as to what additional background is known.  

Although this may not be relevant to this situation at all here is one possibility to consider.  The third quarter grades just came out.  Players who lost sports eligibility for grade deficiencies in the second quarter and improved their academic performance may now qualify to play.  Provided they have completed the physicals, concussion testing etc. it may be a simple as someone finally getting their academics in line.  After that it is all the coaches decision regarding how to handle the situation with regard to player usage.  I haven't seen this in several years but it can happen.