Is there any kind of ruling regarding pitchers use of eyeblack ? We faced a pitcher this weekend who looked like an indian. Players thought it was distracting.Umps said no.(15u HS rules)
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
It's up to the Ump whether he thinks it is distracting. If he said it wasn't then you have to live with it.
Actually, Fed (high school) Rule 6-2-1f prohibits items on the hands, wrists or arms that may be distracting to the batter but makes no mention of the face. But it's still up to the Ump to determine.
I have seen an increase in excessive amounts of eyeblack on players' faces. I guess they believe it makes them look more sinister. It certainly doesn't add to the intended purpose.
I fear a wave of face painting by pitchers on the way that eventually the rules mavens will have to deal with.
Actually, Fed (high school) Rule 6-2-1f prohibits items on the hands, wrists or arms that may be distracting to the batter but makes no mention of the face. But it's still up to the Ump to determine.
I have seen an increase in excessive amounts of eyeblack on players' faces. I guess they believe it makes them look more sinister. It certainly doesn't add to the intended purpose.
I fear a wave of face painting by pitchers on the way that eventually the rules mavens will have to deal with.
Pilsners got it here........no rule against it....
The umpire is the determining factor in what is or what isn't distracting.......
To me if it was just unintentionally smeared then no problem play on........But if a pitcher deliberately painted his face up like a WWF wrestler I'd hand him a towel....
Just my .02
The umpire is the determining factor in what is or what isn't distracting.......
To me if it was just unintentionally smeared then no problem play on........But if a pitcher deliberately painted his face up like a WWF wrestler I'd hand him a towel....
Just my .02
Saw a third baseman this year that looked like a raccoon. Stupid IMO
The whole subject of what is distracting is baffling.
I believe it is very appropriate that FED addresses only adornments of the arms, hands and wrists. Complaints about shoes, sunglasses, eyeblack are, in my opinion, much ado about nothing.
It is similar to when the MLB players union b!tched about plate umpires wearing cream shirts. They whined that they couldn't pick up the ball off the bat, while completely ignoring the fact that catchers, who are positioned in front of the umpire, have worn white jerseys and light grey chest protectors for years.
Focus on the ball, not the pitchers eyes or feet.
End of rant.
I believe it is very appropriate that FED addresses only adornments of the arms, hands and wrists. Complaints about shoes, sunglasses, eyeblack are, in my opinion, much ado about nothing.
It is similar to when the MLB players union b!tched about plate umpires wearing cream shirts. They whined that they couldn't pick up the ball off the bat, while completely ignoring the fact that catchers, who are positioned in front of the umpire, have worn white jerseys and light grey chest protectors for years.
Focus on the ball, not the pitchers eyes or feet.
End of rant.
Jimmy, being truthful aids us in solving this problem for you.quote:Originally posted by Jimmy03:
The whole subject of what is distracting is baffling.
Aid #1 In modern times, there are sunglasses that are called "mirrored". These can reflect directly into batter's eyes.quote:
Complaints about sunglasses...are, in my opinion, much ado about nothing.
Aid #2 Cream shirts don't reflect, Jimmy.quote:It is similar to when the MLB players union b!tched about plate umpires wearing cream shirts.
Aid #3 Watching only the ball is not only impossible but outside of the limits of human vision.quote:Focus on the ball, not the pitchers eyes or feet.
A rant it was; bombastic and extravagantly incorrect.quote:End of rant.
Seems they have rules about everything else. I am sure if there is nothing else to do the powers to be will think something up. If not for this or something else.
Younggunson pitched this past season as a Senior and wore eye black every single game he pitched. Sometimes it was just a rectangle and other times one of his coaches would smear it down on the sides. It motivated his teammates and pumped them up. But to the point, no umpire or opposing coach ever said 1 word about it all season long.
I guess Younggunson will now have to see what his college coach says about it! LOL.
I guess Younggunson will now have to see what his college coach says about it! LOL.
Little puma was always an eye black guy. Just a team bonding thing I think.
I don't remember exactly when but I beieve at one time there was something in the casebook about eyeblack. I may be thinking of another sport so maybe PIAA can help me. I think I remember it saying that as long as it wasn't adornment to intimtate the opposition then it was OK. There were no restriction on size or location just sportmanship with any excess.
MST,
I think you may be thinking the same thing I am.....there was an attempt back in the 90's to ban Body paint as an intimidation tactic...I believe it lasted only one year.
It was basically a focused attempt to ban tattoos.....but as tattoos have become more prolific, they found that they could not legislate that.
There isnt a current rule against eye black.
I think you may be thinking the same thing I am.....there was an attempt back in the 90's to ban Body paint as an intimidation tactic...I believe it lasted only one year.
It was basically a focused attempt to ban tattoos.....but as tattoos have become more prolific, they found that they could not legislate that.
There isnt a current rule against eye black.
Thanks, that was what I remembered but I didn't want to looking through ten years of back rulebooks. Just wanted to make sure I wasn't crazy. 
