Close Call of Week: Hand Part of Basket—Not Base—Ball

When is the hand considered part of the ball; when can a player handle the game ball or puck? It all depends on which sport you are playing; in most cases off the hardwood, the hand is decidedly not part of the ball.

Baseball - Hand is Not Part of the Ball (Hand is Not Part of the Bat)
This most often comes into play during a plate appearance and hit-by-pitch situations wherein a pitched ball strikes (a) the batter's hand or (b) the bat itself. In (a), the batter is awarded first base without liability to be put out unless he has attempted to strike the pitch, in which case a dead ball strike is ruled (if strike three, the batter is out), or he has not attempted to avoid being touched by the ball, in which case a dead ball ball is ruled, or the pitched ball is in the strike zone when it touches the batter, in which case a dead ball strike is ruled, while in (b), the ball is ruled foul. Rule 6.08(b) awards the batter first base by virtue of becoming a runner and entitlement to the base when "he is touched by a pitched ball which he is not attempting to hit," subject to the above conditions. On defense, the hand is likewise not considered part of the ball while possessing it but is simply deemed a body part capable of catching or holding a ball.

Basketball - Hand is Part of the Ball (when in contact with the ball)
This mid-December Close Call of the Week examines a recent foul non-call during an NBA game that ultimately resulted in the ejection of Cavaliers head coach Mike Brown for his excessive campaign for a foul call (see NBA Ejections: McCutchen, Forte, Wright). Replays indicate that as the offensive player attempted to shoot the basketball, the defensive player's hand contacted the shooter's hand while in contact with the ball. Foul or no foul?

All rules codes agree. Whether NFHS, NCAA or NBA/FIBA, the hand is considered "part of the ball" when it is in contact with the basketball, as in a shot attempt. The NFHS rule book, for instance, reminds us of a very important basketball feature in its definitions section pertaining to incidental contact: "The mere fact that contact occurs does not constitute a foul" (NFHS 4-27-1 & NBA Comments on the Rules II-A-1). In this situation, it is specifically legal for a defender to use the hands to reach to block or slap the ball controlled by an offensive player and "accidentally [hit] the hand of the opponent when it is contact with the ball (NFHS 4-24-2). The NBA specifically expands on this point in its "Comments on the Rules" section: "The hand is considered “part of the ball” when it is in contact with the ball. Therefore, contact on that hand by a defender while it is in contact with the ball is not illegal" (II-A-1).

Football - Hand is Not Part of the Ball
In American and Canadian football, the hand is afforded special privileges that only the feet share (e.g., a hand or foot may touch the ground and the ballcarrier is not considered down [NFHS/NCAA] or down by contact [NFL]), though may not be used solely to establish inbounds status (NFL Rule 3-2-6). The hand is used to establish player possession (3-2-7), or to hand off the ball yet no rule exists prohibiting contact with the hand, as inter-squad contact is allowed in this sport.

Hockey - Hand is Not Part of the Puck (penalties for certain extended contact / checks legal)
Though the sport only uses a ball in its "field" and "roller" incarnations, the ball or puck for ice hockey is separate and distinct from the player's hand (or glove). Hockey allows batting of the ball or puck with the open hand, but a glove pass and—except for the goalie —covering or closing the hand over the puck is generally illegal. A player can catch the puck out of mid air, provided the player immediately places or knocks it down to the ice. Skating with the puck to avoid a check or gain territorial advantage results in a minor penalty for closing the hand (NHL 67.1). When the penalty occurs in the goal crease area, a penalty shot shall be assessed or a goal awarded (NHL 67.2, 67.4, 67.5). Checks are legal in hockey for those in possession or playing the puck, but contact with the hand is not distinguished.

Soccer (Football/Futbol) - Hand is Not Part of the Ball (except for goalkeepers, is generally illegal use)
Because the use of hands is generally prohibited in this sport save for throw-in situations (deliberate handling of the ball except for the keeper in the penalty area results in a direct free kick / it is a send-off [red card] offense if it denies an obvious goalscoring opportunity [DOGSO]), it is clear the hand is not part of the ball (FIFA Law 12). As for goalkeepers attempting to play a loose ball at the same instant an attacking player attempts to kick or deflect the ball, Law 12 simply states, "when a goalkeeper has gained possession of the ball with his hands, he cannot be challenged by an opponent." Because a goalkeeper generally attempts to secure possession through the use of the hands/torso/neck/head area, it may be considered "playing in a dangerous manner...that, while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone," which is an offence (Law 12). A goalkeeper illegally handling a ball in the penalty area by virtue of a >six-second possession, touching the ball again with the hands after releasing from possession, touching the ball with hands after a deliberate kick or throw-in from a teammate results in an indirect free kick (Law 12).

Close Call of the Week: NBA Flagrant & Technical Ejections

Referees Scott Foster (crew chief), David Jones (R) & Marat Kogut (R2/Umpire) ejected Portland Trail Blazers center Meyers Leonard for a flagrant foul penalty two and Philadelphia 76ers center Daniel Orton for a technical foul in the 4th quarter of the Trail Blazers-76ers game. With 7:19 remaining in the 4th period, Leonard and Orton became entangled at the lower defensive block, away from the ball. Replays indicate Leonard committed a takedown upon Orton, both players falling to the ground as Leonard was whistled for the flagrant foul (type two). During the dead ball skirmish on the ground, Orton appeared to punch/throw an elbow at Leonard's jaw, resulting in a technical foul and ejection. At the time of the ejections, the Trail Blazers were leading, 126-92. The Trail Blazers ultimately won the contest, 139-105.

Wrap: Portland Trail Blazers vs. Philadelphia 76ers, 12/14/13
Video: Physical altercation during play in blowout game leads to throw down, elbow to the mouth

Discussion Point: How is play resumed? What is the proper ruling in college (NCAA), high school (NFHS)?

NBA: Instant Replay is used to determine Leonard (herein "A1")'s foul constituted a flagrant foul penalty two—the takedown was both excessive and unnecessary. Orton (herein "B1") was assessed a technical foul for unsportsmanlike acts during the dead ball period immediately after A1's FF2 foul. The technical is shot first. Because both players were ejected, play is resumed with one technical foul free throw, taken by any of the four remaining players on the floor for Portland (herein "Team A"). Immediately thereafter, the opposing ("Team A") coach shall select the shooter from Philadelphia (herein "Team B")'s bench to shoot the two free throws for the flagrant foul. Team B basketball at the free throw extended. (Rules 12A-V-j, 12B-IV-b, 13-I-a(3), Case Play 123).
- tldr, A1=FF2, B1=Tech, A1 & B1 = Ejected; 1 Tech FT to Team A; 2 FF2 FTs to Team B (HC A choice); B ball.

NCAA: Using Instant Replay, officials rule A1's foul constitutes a flagrant 2 personal foul, resulting in automatic ejection, as in the NBA ruling. B1 is issued a Class A Unsporting Technical for flagrantly (severe/extreme) contacting an opponent while the ball is dead; he too is automatically ejected by rule. Because this is a false double foul (second foul occurred while the clock was stopped for the first foul) and includes a contact dead ball technical foul, the fouls are penalized in the order they occurred. After awarding two free throws for the flagrant foul to B1's substitute, any player from Team A shoots two free throws for the technical foul. Team A basketball at the division line. (Rules 8-3-2, 8-3-4, 10-1-17, 10-1-PENALTY-d-2, 10-3-1-d/e, 10-3-PENALTY, 11-2-1-d-1, A.R. 235).
- tldr, A1=FF2, B1=Cl A Tech, A1 & B1 = Ejected; 2 FF2 FTs to B1's sub; 2 Tech FTs to Team A; A ball.

NFHS: Officials rule A1's foul constitutes a flagrant personal foul, resulting in automatic disqualification to the team bench. B1 is assessed a flagrant technical foul for his dead ball actions, resulting in automatic disqualification to the team bench. As in the NCAA scenario, this is a false double foul; each foul carries its own penalties and are penalized in the order they occurred. After awarding two free throws for the flagrant foul to B1's substitute, any player from Team A shoots two free throws for the technical foul. Team A basketball at the division line. (Rules 8-2, 8-3, 8-6-3, 10-3-7, 10-PENALTY-7).
- tldr, A1=FF, B1=Flag Tech, A1 & B1 = Disqualified; 2 FF FTs to B1's sub; 2 Tech FTs to Team A; A ball.

NBA Ejections: Monty McCutchen, Brian Forte, Sean Wright

Referees Monty McCutchen, Brian Forte & Sean Wright ejected Cleveland Cavaliers head coach Mike Brown for arguing a no-call (blocked shot) during the 2nd quarter of the Cavaliers-Heat game. With 3:14 remaining in the 2nd period, Cavaliers forward Alonzo Gee attempted to score a fast break layup, but was blocked by Heat forward Shane Battier, the carom rebounded by Heat center Chris Bosh. Replays indicate Battier's hand pressed atop the basketball in Gee's hand, the foul non-call was correct (NCC). Brown was issued a first technical for running onto the playing area to argue the play and a second disqualifying technical for continuing to violate the NBA's Respect for the Game guidelines. At the time of the ejection, the Heat were leading, 55-45. The Heat ultimately won the contest, 114-107.

Wrap: Cleveland Cavaliers vs. Miami Heat, 12/14/13
Video: Mike Brown passionately campaigns for foul call on Battier's all-ball stuff of forward Gee

MLB Rules Committee Approves HP Collision Ban

MLB will ban home plate collisions in 2014, requiring catchers provide a path to home plate and runners to slide or otherwise look to avoid contact, if a proposal by baseball's Official Playing Rules Committee is approved by the MLB Players' Association. If the Association, which is expected to approve the rules change, vetoes the proposal, MLB may still be able to institute the rule for the 2015 regular season.

As announced by MLB Executive Vice President of Baseball Operations Joe Torre and Rules Committee Chairman Sandy Alderson, the collision prevention rule will prohibit base runners from initiating contact with the catcher. In turn, catchers will be prohibited from blocking access to home plate. The precise language of the rule change—including procedures, case plays and prescribed penalties—have not yet been determined. Brian Gorman is the only active umpire to serve on MLB's Playing Rules Committee.

Rule 7.06(b) NOTE, which pertains to Obstruction Type B, presently states, "The catcher, without the ball in his possession, has no right to block the pathway of the runner attempting to score. The base line belongs to the runner and the catcher should be there only when he is fielding a ball or when he already has the ball in his hand." Though unclear if this definition will be expanded if the rule is approved, the expectation is that the catcher will lose the right to block access to home plate even when in the process of fielding or in possession of the baseball.

With MLB's proposed change to OBR on the table, let's review malicious contact ("MC") and flagrant collision as the terms appears in high school (NFHS) and college (NCAA) rule codes, respectively.

NFHS: Rule 3-3-1 pertains to malicious contact, providing penalties for initiating MC from either the offensive or defensive position. Upon MC, (1) the ball is dead, (2) if on offense and not already removed from the base paths ["out" or "scored"], the offending batter/runner is declared out, and (3) the offending player is ejected from the game. If the defense commits the MC, the umpire shall award penalties that in his/her judgment will nullify the act of MC (similar to obstruction B or fan interference). MC can be used to augment other calls (e.g., MC added to interference, as in NFHS 2009 Rule Interpretation 17 [With R1, B1 interferes with fielder taking throw at first base maliciously so that R1 may advance to 3B; Ruling: Eject B1, return R1 to base occupied at time of interference].

Malicious Contact has been a point of emphasis ("POE") in high school for several years, most recently for the upcoming 2014 season (it claims the #1 spot for 2014 POEs).

NCAA: High school's "malicious contact" compares to college's "Flagrant Collision," as in NCAA Rule 2-30. Additionally, Rule 8-7 is the "Collision Rule" and states "the rules committee is concerned about unnecessary and violent collisions with the catcher at home plate, and with infielder at all bases. The intent of this rule is to encourage base runners and defensive players to avoid such collisions whenever possible." However, NCAA does not presently prohibit its fielders (catchers) from blocking the base/plate, as long as there is "clear possession of the ball." When a collision between runner and fielder occurs, the umpire shall judge whether the defense has provided access to the base/plate and the offense's legitimate attempt to advance/reach in a legal fashion and without the use of flagrant or malicious contact. The specifically states that "contact above the waist that was initiated by the base runner shall not be judged as an attempt to reach the base or plate...The runner must make an actual attempt to reach the base (plate)."  The penalties for flagrant collisions are similar to that of NFHS MC.

NCAA recognizes that if a runner's path to the base is blocked, "unavoidable contact" may occur and may qualify as obstruction pursuant to Rule 2-54 (but not if the fielder is in possession of or in the act of fielding the ball).

Therefore, it is clear the present order (e.g., circa 2013 season) of HP collision tolerance is, from least restrictive to most restrictive, OBR => NCAA => NFHS.

It remains to be seen, however, whether OBR will surpass NCAA restrictions in actively requiring, as opposed to simply encouraging its catchers not to block the plate.

Close Call of the Week: NHL Overtime Penalty Strength

Last night, a CCS follower asked a question about NHL overtime rules, specifically how on-ice strength is determined during the extra 4x4 period when one or both teams suffers two or more concurrent or subsequent penalties, as was the case during Tuesday's Kings-Ducks freeway rivalry game, decided in a shootout.

The Play: With just 29 seconds remaining in regulation of a 2-2 game, Kings RW Justin Williams received a two-minute minor for slashing against Corey Perry, giving Anaheim a power play to end the third period. The score still tied, the teams headed to overtime and four-on-four skating, only with the Kings down to three due to the wraparound Williams penalty. 27 seconds into the five-minute overtime period, Perry drew another penalty, a slash by Kings defenseman Willie Mitchell, who joined Williams in LA's penalty box.

Question: Is Anaheim allowed to skate with five during the overtime two-man advantage?

NHL's Table 20 - Rule 84 - Overtime Penalties

Short Answer: Yes, Anaheim is awarded a fifth skater because Los Angeles is obliged to add one skater to bring its on-ice strength up to three. (LAK 2 + 1 = 3 / ANA 4 + 1 = 5)

Explanation and References: According to NHL Rule 84 regarding overtime and Table 20 regarding overtime penalty assessment, once a team receives a second minor penalty, each team must add one player to their on-ice strength. For Los Angeles, adding one player effectively increases on-ice strength from two to three while for Anaheim, this increases on-ice strength from four-to-five. The reason for this is that no team shall skate with an on-ice strength of less than three skaters.

Bonus: Playing five-on-three, the Ducks received a minor penalty at 1:24 due to Dustin Penner's interference against Jarret Stoll, creating a four-on-three situation. When LAK Williams' penalty expired at 1:31 and he exited the penalty box, the teams skated four-on-four even though each team had one player serving a penalty. The rules state play shall continue four-on-four, but at the next stoppage of play (prior to the expiration of either penalty), the strength shall be adjusted to three-on-three, the standard procedure for coincidental minor penalties during overtime. In this situation, the Kings skated four-on-three when Mitchell's penalty expired at 2:27 while both teams returned to full strength (4x4 for OT) when Penner's penalty expired at 3:24.

Winter Baseball Ejection Update, November 2013

Offseason winter baseball leagues produced the following ejections during the month of November, 2013:

HP Umpire Tom Honec: Toros del Este Manager Orlando Merced for arguing a ball call (D, 11/30)^
1B Umpire Felipe Romero: Mayos de Navojoa SS Jose Chavez for arguing an out call (M, 11/27)
2B Umpire Gabrial Alfonzo: Aguilas del Zulia 2B Jose Pirela for arguing a strike call (V, 11/27)
HP Umpire Oscar Marin: Algodoneros de Guasave 1B Mark Hamilton for arguing a strike three call (M, 11/24)
1B Umpire Delfin Colon ejected Indios de Mayaguez Manager Carlos Baerga; out call, (RC, 11/24)`
1B Umpire Demian Hernandez: Yaquis de Obregon LF Doug Clark & Manager Eddy Diaz; out call (M, 11/24)
HP Umpire Trent Thomas: Canberra Cavalry Manager Michael Collins for arguing balls & strikes (ABL, 11/22)
HP Umpire Carlos Rey: Indios de Mayaguez Manager Carlos Baerga for arguing balls & strikes (RC, 11/22)
HP Umpire Delfin Colon: Criollos de Caguas 3B Andy Gonzalez & Manager Pedro Lopez; strike 3 (RC, 11/21)`
HP Umpire Charlie Rivera: Leones de Ponce DH Ivan De Jesus & Mgr Carmelo Martinez; strike 3 (RC, 11/21)
3B Umpire Santo Castillo: Aguilas Cibaenas Manager Felix Fermin; check swing strike (D, 11/21)
HP Umpire Domingo Polanco: Tigres del Licey Manager Mike Guerrero for arguing a strike call (D, 11/21)
HP Umpire Luis Gonzalez: Tiburones de La Guaira DH Alex Cabrera & Mgr Tony DeFrancesco; K 3 (V, 11/20)
3B Umpire Marco Nava: Naranjeros de Hermosillo Manager Matias Carrillo Sr.; check swing strike (M, 11/18)
HP Umpire Ryan Blakney ejected Leones del Caracas pitcher Angel Calero; balls and strikes (V, 11/17)^
HP Umpire Pat Hoberg: Surprise Saguaros CF Tyler Naquin; strike three call, (AFL, 11/14)^

*AFL = Arizona Fall, ABL = Australian, D = Dominican, M = Mexicana del Pacifico, RC = Roberto Clemente (Puerto Rico), V = Venezuelan*

^Signifies MiLB (Rookie, A [+/-], AA or AAA) umpire. `Delfin Colon is a former MiLB call-up umpire (08-09).

NFL Ejections: Referee Carl Cheffers' Crew

Referee Carl Cheffers' crew ejected Vikings DB Chris Cook for unsportsmanlike conduct: contacting an official during the 3rd quarter of the Bears-Vikings game. With 5:15 remaining in the 3rd period, Bears wide receiver Alshon Jeffery caught a 46-yard pass from quarterback Josh McCown for a touchdown, evading defender Cook in the process. Replays indicate that after the play, Cook contacted side judge Laird Hayes in an unsporting manner, resulting in an automatic 15-yard USC penalty and disqualification, as prescribed by rule. At the time of the ejection, the Bears were leading, 12-7.

Wrap: Chicago Bears vs. Minnesota Vikings, 12/1/13
Video: Jeffery evades Cook for athletic touchdown / Cook grabs Hayes to argue after the play, is ejected

Final Results: 2013 UEFL Rules Summit

Final results for the 2013 UEFL Rules Summit are in. The Umpire Ejection Fantasy League announces the following rules changes for the 2014 UEFL Season. The results of the Summit have been referred to the UEFL Rules Committee for formal codification and adoption (the 2014 UEFL Rules will be released prior to standard registration, by February 2014):

3-3-a: Incorporation of Instant Replay Challenges (Crew Chiefs), pending MLB adoption of expanded replay.
➤ Points as follows... Upheld/Correct: +1, Overturned/Incorrect: -1 (40%; 35% [+1, +0]; 16% [+.5,-.5])

4-2-b/c: Instant Replay Review (Challenge) ejections will be treated similarly to umpire consultation ejections.
4-7: Incorporation of Instant Replay Challenges (Primary/Secondary Umpires), pending MLB adoption.
➤ Points as follows... Upheld/Correct: +1, Overturned/Incorrect: -1 (44%; 19% [+2, -1]; 16% [+1, -0])

6-1: Filing an appeal will be restricted to UEFL members with no restriction on # of appeals/season 23%).
➤ Points for Original Ruling Upheld (appeal unsuccessful): -1 (65%; vs. 33% [-0] vs. 2% [-2])
➤ Points for Original Ruling Overturned (appeal successful): +1 (56%; vs. 44% [+0])
6-5-b-8: If, after appeal, the Original Ruling is overturned, the post shall be edited to reflect the revised Ruling.
6-5-c: Pitch count descriptors will be assigned to define the "realistic effect" or difference ball/strike QOC.

2014 UEFL Appeals Board: Gil, Jeremy, RichMSN, tmac, BT_Blue, Turducken, [vacancies via '14 election]

Thank you all for participating in the 2013 UEFL Rules Summit and we'll see you in 2014. Now stay tuned for the December feature, "Top 25 Ejections of 2013" as well as quasi-weekly updates on ejections around the sports world, including the Australian Baseball League (ABL) and Caribbean Winter Leagues, featuring MiLB umpires such as Ryan Blakney, Ben May, Jon Saphire (Venezuela); Kelvin Bultron (Roberto Clemente); Jonathan Bailey and Adam Hamari (Dominican). Former MLB fill-in umpire Delfin Colon (Roberto Clemente) and WBC alumns such as Paul Hyham (Australia), Carlos Rey and Jair Fernandez (Mexicana del Pacifico) also work these winter ball leagues.

Close Call of the Week: Tomlin Steps Out (NFL)

Welcome to "Close Call of the Week," the CCS expansion of "Ask the UEFL" in which we analyze a significant play across the sports world and its resulting calls or no-calls. In this debut feature, we examine Pittsburgh Steelers head coach Mike Tomlin's sideline adventure during an NFL kickoff play on Thanksgiving Day.

The Play: With 6:26 remaining in the 3rd quarter of Thursday's Steelers-Ravens game, Steelers kicker Shaun Suisham kicked off to the opposing goal line, where Ravens return man Jacoby Jones caught the fly and returned the ball past midfield and into Steelers territory. As Jones approached the 40-yard line, Steelers coach Mike Tomlin appeared to be straddling the sideline at the 38-yard line with his back to the play, sidestepping onto the thick white stripe of the sideline as Jones approached. Jones appeared to have slightly altered his route, changing trajectory from running parallel to the sideline to a thirty degree angle in, his body position changed from being directly even with the sideline to clear of the two-foot long sideline hash mark before being tackled at the 27-yard line.

Question: Did Tomlin commit an infraction of the rules and if so, what is the appropriate penalty?

Short Answer: Yes, Tomlin's actions violated NFL rules. At minimum, Tomlin should have been penalized for unsportsmanlike conduct. The 15-yard penalty ("half the distance") would place the ball at the 13.5-yard line. At most, Tomlin could have been disqualified (ejected) for a flagrant or palpably unfair act and a touchdown awarded to Baltimore. Intent is not relevant in determining that Tomlin's positioning violated zone restrictions, though intent may be relevant in determining whether or not Tomlin's actions were flagrant or palpably unfair. Rules 1-1, 13-4, 13-5, AR 13.7, AR 13.8.

Explanation and References: NFL Football contains a series of restricting zones on both sidelines of the field, prescribing where chain crew, officials, coaches, situation substitution players, bench personnel and the media may—and may not—position themselves during play. When the ball becomes live, the six-foot "white stripe" of sideline closest to live ball territory is reserved for the chain crew and officials only, the next six feet between the 32-yard lines for coaches and situation substitution players only, followed by bench personnel further back and the media no closer than 36-feet (12-yards) removed from the field of play between both halves' 32-yard lines. Rules for marking or lining a field are codified in Rule 1-1 (The Field) while rules restricting team personnel to their respective zones are codified in Rules 13-4 and 13-5.

Because Tomlin clearly violated zone integrity, he should have been penalized, at minimum, 15 yards for unsportsmanlike conduct. Enforcement action 13-1(b) specifies the Referee (white hat) may, after consulting with crew, award the 15-yard penalty from "whatever spot...[he] deems equitable, if the ball was in play." If Tomlin's violation was considered flagrant, the Referee may have excluded or ejected him from the game.

Approved Ruling 13.7 and A.R. 13.8 specifically address the case of "coach in six-foot border." The NFL's official case book concludes that if the officials encounter a coach within the six-foot border (white stripe) and interference, impedance or any effect on play results, the officials "may enforce whatever penalty they think is equitable under the circumstances," including the negation or award of a score.

OFFICIATING ANALYSIS: This is an incorrect no-call (NCI). The proper call would have either been a 15-yard unsportsmanlike penalty ("half the distance") for infraction of Rule 13-1 or the award of a touchdown for this same violation; the difference between a Quality of Correctness of "correct" and "incorrect" for this call is whether or not the officials (1) recognized the foul and (2) enforced the penalty, which video evidence conclusively shows did occur. For the safety of participants involved (the (1) offending team personnel and (2) flank official whether side judge, field judge, head linesman or line judge), this penalty must be called.

Wrap: Pittsburgh Steelers vs. Baltimore Ravens (NFL Football), 11/28/13

Video: NBC's Cris Collinsworth questions Tomlin's thought process upon consultation of video instant replay

Results: 2013 Rules Summit

The Umpire Ejection Fantasy League's 2013 Rules Summit has concluded its first round of voting. The following includes a list of proposals and initiatives which have been adopted and those rejected or subject to further review by the UEFL Office of the Commissioner. These proposals are now rules and will take immediate effect.

**The 2013 Summit has resulted in the necessitation of a run-off vote. Click here to jump to this ballot.**

Key: Measures in bold have passed and are now rules. Proposals in italics did not pass and are not adopted.

3-3-a: Crew Chief Points, Incorrect Call (49%). CC QOC points structure will remain at 2013 levels.
3-3-b: Crew Chief Points, Instant Replay Challenge (68%). Points to be determined via run-off ballot.

4-2-b/c: Instant Replay Review and Consultation (98%). IR added to instances of "umpire consultation."
4-4-i: Active Duty Death and the Wally Bell Memorial Award (49%). Addressed on case-by-case basis.
4-7: Instant Replay Challenges (84%). Now tracking IR. Points to be determined via run-off ballot.

6-1: Restriction on Appeal Eligibility (80%). Only UEFL'ers may file appeal. Terms via run-off ballot.
6-1: Refiling or Re-Challenging a Ruling (45%). Appeals may only be filed once per ejection(s) event.
6-2-b-5-c: Throwing of Equipment as Irrecusable (50%). Addressed on case-by-case basis.
6-2-b-5-d: Check Swings as Irrecusable (30%). Check swings assigned QOC status, as previous.
6-5-b-8: Post-Appeal Editing of Original Post (82%). Description must reflect revised QOC.
6-5-c: Defining the Realistic Different Outcome (56%). Pitch count descriptors assigned for QOC.
8-3: Entry Fee (22%). UEFL remains free to join.

Appeals-1: BT_Blue (71%). BT_Blue is elected to the 2014 Appeals Board.
Appeals-2: RichMSN (90%). RichMSN is elected to the 2014 Appeals Board.
Appeals-3: tmac (84%). tmac is elected to the 2014 Appeals Board.
Appeals-4: Turducken (79%). Turducken is elected to the 2014 Appeals Board.

Registration for the 2014 UEFL, Appeals Board nomination and sign up information, including information regarding the Crew, Primary and Secondary Umpires' drafts, will be available by February 2014.

Click the below "Read more" link to access the run-off election ballot. It will close Thursday at 11:59 PM PT.