Anyone see this?

[scrounge]

I had this recently. But <acronym title='Pitcher'><acronym title='Pitcher'>F1</acronym></acronym> started yelling "get the ball, get the ball"

Right or wrong I got him for verbal interference.

Verbal interference? On the pitcher talking to his players??

absolutely. Same as if a fielder or fan for that matter starts hollering "back" to baserunners or baserunners hollering "I got it" on fly balls.

However, in the two cases you cite, it's a players something to the *other* team, not his own teammates. I don't know that this crosses the threshold of verbal interference.

[SanDiegoSteve]

I had this recently. But F1 started yelling "get the ball, get the ball"

Right or wrong I got him for verbal interference.

Verbal interference? On the pitcher talking to his players??

Absolutely! He was running towards the Runner to tag him while he was yelling trying to confuse him. Maybe I was wrong but it sure sounds like a verbal interference to me!

As was already stated, he is talking to his own players, not the other team. If the runner is naive enough to take his eye off the baseball and buy the fake throw like my dog does, then he deserves to be out. It is a stretch to get Verbal Interference with this. Only in FED could they come up with something like VI. It is a very weak rule. :violin:

[JaxRolo]

I had this recently. But <acronym title='Pitcher'><acronym title='Pitcher'>F1</acronym></acronym> started yelling "get the ball, get the ball"

Right or wrong I got him for verbal interference.

Verbal interference? On the pitcher talking to his players??

absolutely. Same as if a fielder or fan for that matter starts hollering "back" to baserunners or baserunners hollering "I got it" on fly balls.

However, in the two cases you cite, it's a players something to the *other* team, not his own teammates. I don't know that this crosses the threshold of verbal interference.

But we still know he is trying to deceive the runner. His yelling is not really directed at his own players. Just a form of deception to the runner.

[SanDiegoSteve]

But we still know he is trying to deceive the runner. His yelling is not really directed at his own players. Just a form of deception to the runner.

It is not illegal to deceive the runner. It is illegal to illegally deceive the runner. There are many forms of legal deception. This, I do believe, is one of them.

[JaxRolo]

But we still know he is trying to deceive the runner. His yelling is not really directed at his own players. Just a form of deception to the runner.

It is not illegal to deceive the runner. It is illegal to illegally deceive the runner. There are many forms of legal deception. This, I do believe, is one of them.

I see it as illegal (FED) and will call it everytime. I have only had to call it once and not one person questioned it.

[carolinablue]

I don't think every trick play in baseball is bush. Personally, I don't like plays such as skunk in the outfield or broken mirror because they take advantage of loopholes in the rules and frankly are just ridiculous. However, it is a game and I do think there is room for creativity and fun. I mean when there is a R1 and R3 and R1 attempts to steal and F2 fires towards second and F6 comes running in to cut the ball off and they get R3 at home, that's a form of a trick play you see every day. I don't think anyone thinks that's bush league.

Does anyone know where the hidden ball trick originated, I would be surprised if it wasn't the pros?

[NFUA_44]

But we still know he is trying to deceive the runner. His yelling is not really directed at his own players. Just a form of deception to the runner.

It is not illegal to deceive the runner. It is illegal to illegally deceive the runner. There are many forms of legal deception. This, I do believe, is one of them.

I see it as illegal (FED) and will call it everytime. I have only had to call it once and not one person questioned it.

This still doesn't equate when you have F1 speaking to his own team. Your rewarding the runner who screwed up by not paying attention to where the ball is. This isn't a situation where you have an offensive player shouting at F6 as he's trying to make a play, which is the spirit and intent of the rule (IMHO), though it's a really a marginal rule that FED devised, at best. It wasn't put out there to monitor what a player says to his own teammates.

Just because nobody said anything about it doesn't make it the right call. I called a balk on Monday night, that right after it came out of my mouth I knew I had booted it. Nobody said a word, including F1 and I would have been hard pressed to give a reasonable explanation if they had.

Just my .02

[SanDiegoSteve]

But we still know he is trying to deceive the runner. His yelling is not really directed at his own players. Just a form of deception to the runner.

It is not illegal to deceive the runner. It is illegal to illegally deceive the runner. There are many forms of legal deception. This, I do believe, is one of them.

I see it as illegal (FED) and will call it everytime. I have only had to call it once and not one person questioned it.

This still doesn't equate when you have F1 speaking to his own team. Your rewarding the runner who screwed up by not paying attention to where the ball is. This isn't a situation where you have an offensive player shouting at F6 as he's trying to make a play, which is the spirit and intent of the rule (IMHO), though it's a really a marginal rule that FED devised, at best. It wasn't put out there to monitor what a player says to his own teammates.

Just because nobody said anything about it doesn't make it the right call. I called a balk on Monday night, that right after it came out of my mouth I knew I had booted it. Nobody said a word, including F1 and I would have been hard pressed to give a reasonable explanation if they had.

Just my .02

I agree, it's a stupid rule, written vaguely and without clear definition.

Verbal Obstruction is, as I understand it, only applied when a player verbally impedes a runner, such as yelling "back," or "go, go, go," and that sort of thing at the runner. It does not include phrases such as "he's going," or "go get the ball," in other words, talking to your own teammates.

According to the rules, Verbal Interference is different. It is an offensive penalty only, and includes confusing the defense, as in yelling "drop it" when running past a fielder, for example.

On the other hand, Verbal Obstruction has no provision for "confusing" the offense. Confusing the offense is not against the rules. To get an VO, the defense must either hinder or change the pattern of the play as in 5-1-3 and 8-3-2. This applies during an intentional walk, a baserunning award, or obstructing a runner advancing or returning to a base. None of these requirements are met by a trick play or any verbal phrase directed by a defensive player toward his own team. A good example of Verbal Obstruction is telling a runner it was a foul ball so he will leave the base and try to return to the previous base, and then subsequently be tagged out. OBR, tough luck. FED, Verbal Obstruction.

OBR has no such thing as Verbal OBS or INT. Did I mention how much I love OBR?

[JamesC]

No way this is verbal obstruction. Not in FED, not in any rule set. He is talking to his teammates, whether it is truthful talk or not, still his teammates. This should never be considered verbal interference. The offense should be smart and alert enough not to be caught up in this mess. That's their own fault. If you can't see the ball, you should keep your ass on the bag. Plain and simple!

[JaxRolo]

But we still know he is trying to deceive the runner. His yelling is not really directed at his own players. Just a form of deception to the runner.

It is not illegal to deceive the runner. It is illegal to illegally deceive the runner. There are many forms of legal deception. This, I do believe, is one of them.

I see it as illegal (FED) and will call it everytime. I have only had to call it once and not one person questioned it.

This still doesn't equate when you have F1 speaking to his own team. Your rewarding the runner who screwed up by not paying attention to where the ball is. This isn't a situation where you have an offensive player shouting at F6 as he's trying to make a play, which is the spirit and intent of the rule (IMHO), though it's a really a marginal rule that FED devised, at best. It wasn't put out there to monitor what a player says to his own teammates.

Just because nobody said anything about it doesn't make it the right call. I called a balk on Monday night, that right after it came out of my mouth I knew I had booted it. Nobody said a word, including F1 and I would have been hard pressed to give a reasonable explanation if they had.

Just my .02

I see what you are saying. But he was not really talking to his own players. (in my Judgement).

We talked about it in our association meeting and decided it was the right call. They said I could have ejected for unsportsmanlike conduct.

Lie I said I only have had to call this once and hopefully won't happen again.

[JaxRolo]

I agree, it's a stupid rule, written vaguely and without clear definition.

Verbal Obstruction is, as I understand it, only applied when a player verbally impedes a runner, such as yelling "back," or "go, go, go," and that sort of thing at the runner. It does not include phrases such as "he's going," or "go get the ball," in other words, talking to your own teammates.

According to the rules, Verbal Interference is different. It is an offensive penalty only, and includes confusing the defense, as in yelling "drop it" when running past a fielder, for example.

any verbal phrase directed by a defensive player toward his own team. A good example of Verbal Obstruction is telling a runner it was a foul ball so he will leave the base and try to return to the previous base, and then subsequently be tagged out. OBR, tough luck. FED, Verbal Obstruction.

Again in my judgement he was NOT talking to his own players. There was no ball to get when he said "get the ball". He was basically telling the runner to "go,go ,go" just not in those words.

[JaxRolo]

No way this is verbal obstruction. Not in FED, not in any rule set. He is talking to his teammates, whether it is truthful talk or not, still his teammates. This should never be considered verbal interference. The offense should be smart and alert enough not to be caught up in this mess. That's their own fault. If you can't see the ball, you should keep your ass on the bag. Plain and simple!

Again in my judgement he was NOT talking to his own players. There was no ball to get when he said "get the ball". He was basically telling the runner to "go,go ,go" just not in those words. (in my Judgement)

[scrounge]

I rather like the FED rule, in the context of what FED is trying to achieve - namely, promoting sportsmanship. Understanding that as the context, it makes sense that talking to the other team with things like "I've got it" or "FOUL" to trip up the opponent are and should be illegal in the school setting. But I don't believe that talking to your own team, even for deceptive purposes, falls under that. If a pitcher told his catcher quietly - but not quite quietly enough, just loud enough so the batter heard - that he would throw a curve the next pitch and threw a fastball, is that illegal? Of course not. Yet it was deceptive. The only fake fielding play explicitly disallowed is the fake tag, for safety reasons.

An opponent should have no expectation of protection if they choose to act on what they hear the other team say to each other. It's their choice to react to that. I do see a difference between that and if one team

[JaxRolo]

I rather like the FED rule, in the context of what FED is trying to achieve - namely, promoting sportsmanship. Understanding that as the context, it makes sense that talking to the other team with things like "I've got it" or "FOUL" to trip up the opponent are and should be illegal in the school setting. But I don't believe that talking to your own team, even for deceptive purposes, falls under that. If a pitcher told his catcher quietly - but not quite quietly enough, just loud enough so the batter heard - that he would throw a curve the next pitch and threw a fastball, is that illegal? Of course not. Yet it was deceptive. The only fake fielding play explicitly disallowed is the fake tag, for safety reasons.

An opponent should have no expectation of protection if they choose to act on what they hear the other team say to each other. It's their choice to react to that. I do see a difference between that and if one team

Again in my judgement he was NOT talking to his own players. There was no ball to get when he said "get the ball". He was basically telling the runner to "go,go ,go" just not in those words. ( in my judgment)

[scrounge]

Again in my judgement he was NOT talking to his own players. There was no ball to get when he said "get the ball". He was basically telling the runner to "go,go ,go" just not in those words. ( in my judgment)

In this specific case I don't see it but that's an entirely reasonable judgment. Good point to think about.

[stl_ump]

Very similar. <acronym title='Pitcher'>F1</acronym> feints to 2B, <acronym title='Shortstop'>F6</acronym> <acronym title='Second baseman'>F4</acronym> and <acronym title='Center fielder'>F8</acronym> all start chasing the "ball". <acronym title='Base runner at 2B'>R2</acronym> breaks for 3B and <acronym title='Pitcher'>F1</acronym> has him cold in no man's land. Perfectly legal according to the <acronym title='Federation Rules (High School)'>FED</acronym> case book, but horses**t bush league in my book. Hope I never see it again. Garbage. Beat em with the bats and leather, not cheap bush tactics.

I had this recently. But F1 started yelling "get the ball, get the ball"

Right or wrong I got him for verbal interference.

Verbal interference? Who did he interfer with? :huh:

[JaxRolo]

Very similar. <acronym title='Pitcher'>F1</acronym> feints to 2B, <acronym title='Shortstop'>F6</acronym> <acronym title='Second baseman'>F4</acronym> and <acronym title='Center fielder'>F8</acronym> all start chasing the "ball". <acronym title='Base runner at 2B'>R2</acronym> breaks for 3B and <acronym title='Pitcher'>F1</acronym> has him cold in no man's land. Perfectly legal according to the <acronym title='Federation Rules (High School)'>FED</acronym> case book, but horses**t bush league in my book. Hope I never see it again. Garbage. Beat em with the bats and leather, not cheap bush tactics.

I had this recently. But F1 started yelling "get the ball, get the ball"

Right or wrong I got him for verbal interference.

Verbal interference? Who did he interfer with?

Ok we all know I should have said Obstruction.

AGAIN! (IN MY JUDGEMENT) Again in my judgement he was NOT talking to his own players. There was no ball to get when he said "get the ball". He was basically telling the runner to "go,go ,go" just not in those words. (IN MY JUDGEMENT)

[noumpere]

I see it as illegal (FED) and will call it everytime. I have only had to call it once and not one person questioned it.

Yep and I had verbal obstruction the other day when the catcher yelled "let it go" on a throw from the outfield and then the first baseman caught the ball and got the batter runner out going to second. The catcher was really yelling at the runner.

(sarcasm)

[SanDiegoSteve]

Very similar. <acronym title='Pitcher'>F1</acronym> feints to 2B, <acronym title='Shortstop'>F6</acronym> <acronym title='Second baseman'>F4</acronym> and <acronym title='Center fielder'>F8</acronym> all start chasing the "ball". <acronym title='Base runner at 2B'>R2</acronym> breaks for 3B and <acronym title='Pitcher'>F1</acronym> has him cold in no man's land. Perfectly legal according to the <acronym title='Federation Rules (High School)'>FED</acronym> case book, but horses**t bush league in my book. Hope I never see it again. Garbage. Beat em with the bats and leather, not cheap bush tactics.

I had this recently. But F1 started yelling "get the ball, get the ball"

Right or wrong I got him for verbal interference.

Verbal interference? Who did he interfer with?

Ok we all know I should have said Obstruction.

AGAIN! (IN MY JUDGEMENT) Again in my judgement he was NOT talking to his own players. There was no ball to get when he said "get the ball". He was basically telling the runner to "go,go ,go" just not in those words. (IN MY JUDGEMENT)

There is still no rule that supports your judgment for Verbal Obstruction. As I said earlier, confusing the offense is NOT prohibited by the rule, unlike it is for Verbal Interference. There is absolutely nothing wrong with trying to dupe or trick the offense with a fake pickoff throw, any more than by using the old hidden ball trick. How anybody can conjure up Obstruction over these things is, quite frankly, silly to me. If you are not directly telling the offense to do something, pretending to be a coach or teammate, then there is no Verbal Obstruction. If you called Verbal Obstruction on a trick pickoff play on me, I would protest the call. It's not a judgment call, it's a rule call.

[JaxRolo]

Verbal interference? Who did he interfer with?

Ok we all know I should have said Obstruction.

AGAIN! (IN MY JUDGEMENT) Again in my judgement he was NOT talking to his own players. There was no ball to get when he said "get the ball". He was basically telling the runner to "go,go ,go" just not in those words. (IN MY JUDGEMENT)

There is still no rule that supports your judgment for Verbal Obstruction. As I said earlier, confusing the offense is NOT prohibited by the rule, unlike it is for Verbal Interference. There is absolutely nothing wrong with trying to dupe or trick the offense with a fake pickoff throw, any more than by using the old hidden ball trick. How anybody can conjure up Obstruction over these things is, quite frankly, silly to me. If you are not directly telling the offense to do something, pretending to be a coach or teammate, then there is no Verbal Obstruction. If you called Verbal Obstruction on a trick pickoff play on me, I would protest the call. It's not a judgment call, it's a rule call.

Goodness Gracious.

So in YOUR Judgement the rules don't support My Judgement.

My Association supports my Judgement and that is who I ultimately answer to.

If you called Verbal Obstruction on a trick pickoff play on me, I would protest the call. It's not a judgment call, it's a rule call.

In Florida there is no Protest under FED. I thought Obstruction was a judgement call?

[SanDiegoSteve]

If you are going to continue to use the word judgment, please use spell check!

See the discussion on this forum we are having: http://forum.officiating.com/baseball/91329-hs-trick-play-2.html

[SanDiegoSteve]

Verbal interference? Who did he interfer with?

Ok we all know I should have said Obstruction.

AGAIN! (IN MY JUDGEMENT) Again in my judgement he was NOT talking to his own players. There was no ball to get when he said "get the ball". He was basically telling the runner to "go,go ,go" just not in those words. (IN MY JUDGEMENT)

There is still no rule that supports your judgment for Verbal Obstruction. As I said earlier, confusing the offense is NOT prohibited by the rule, unlike it is for Verbal Interference. There is absolutely nothing wrong with trying to dupe or trick the offense with a fake pickoff throw, any more than by using the old hidden ball trick. How anybody can conjure up Obstruction over these things is, quite frankly, silly to me. If you are not directly telling the offense to do something, pretending to be a coach or teammate, then there is no Verbal Obstruction. If you called Verbal Obstruction on a trick pickoff play on me, I would protest the call. It's not a judgment call, it's a rule call.

So in YOUR Judgement the rules don't support My Judgement.

No, by rule the rules don't support your judgment. I am not making a judgment call here, I'm going by the rules.

[LMSANS]

If you are going to continue to use the word judgment, please use spell check!

See the discussion on this forum we are having: http://forum.officia...ick-play-2.html

Actually, judgement is acceptable in either form, with or without the e. :wave:

[SanDiegoSteve]

If you are going to continue to use the word judgment, please use spell check!

See the discussion on this forum we are having: http://forum.officia...ick-play-2.html

Actually, judgement is acceptable in either form, with or without the e.

I stand duly corrected. My apologies to Jax!

[sdix00]

If you are going to continue to use the word judgment, please use spell check!

See the discussion on this forum we are having: http://forum.officia...ick-play-2.html

Actually, judgement is acceptable in either form, with or without the e.

I stand duly corrected. My apologies to Jax!

I kid, of course. :)