Register or Sign In to remove these ads

All Activity

This stream auto-updates   

  1. Past hour
  2. Does FED require the runner to react in any way to the fake tag, or is the fake tag itself enough to invoke a penalty?
  3. On the softball side, across most (if not all) rule sets, it is obstruction, the runner will be awarded the base they would have reached if obstruction had not occurred, and the umpire has judgment to eject without warning. It also requires the runner to either slide, slow down, hesitate, or stop. If fielder applies a fake tag and the runner just keeps running there is no obstruction, because their progress has not been impeded. Otherwise, cowboy rules apply - next time fielder is at the plate he gets one in the ear hole.
  4. I agree with the signatures that you recognized, conbo61. But that sure does look like a Rogers Hornsby autograph.
  5. I see those plus Jim Bouton, Phil Linz.
  6. Yes, high school rules prohibit exactly that kind of fake tag: it is obstruction, and the umpire will issue a team warning; any subsequent offense will also be OBS and penalized by ejecting the fielder. Other codes lack this provision (AFAIK).
  7. Today
  8. Agreed. No doubt I would be in deep B for that play.
  9. depending on the rule set there are, what rules or level is the question about.
  10. Ahh thanks, mistook the one signature. i think its a 61-63 yankees ball you're right
  11. Is there any rule governing fielders making fake tags trying to get base runners to slide
  12. I see Ralph Houk, Ralph Terry, Elston Howard, Tom Tresh, Bill Stafford and Hector Lopez. Sorry, no Rogers Hornsby. Looks like it is a ball autographed by several NY Yankees from the early 1960's.
  13. He was in deep C with R1, his choice but I would be in deep B. But with no steal we would go to the open glove side from either position.
  14. Hey guys. Random one here. My buddy showed me an old baseball he has that has a bunch of signatures on it, I've been able to make out Yogi Berra, Jack Reed, but can't make out the others. If anyone can make out the other names, or let me know if the baseball looks legit I'd appreciate it. He wanted to know if it was worth anything.
  15. And he should have said something about this one for sure. Not sure why the umpire was on that side of the bag for this play. I think you can see so much more on the other side of the bag.
  16. Sorry kstrunk, but every time I see alot I think of....
  17. Maybe Mainieri thought it wasn't going to be called that way because it wasn't when he played another Florida team:
  18. First: that's not the penalty by rule. More important: your method won't put other runners back. With INT/FPSR, other runners return to their TOI/TOP bases (depending on the rule, code, etc.).
  19. Jimurray, thanks for setting me straight. Makes sense.
  20. I thought about that: I wasn't sure whether the OP was saying that the runner knocked the ball out (intent) or the collision did. The former will always be INT; the latter will require a judgment about protection.
  21. Plate umpire for last night's CWS game http://www.dailypress.com/sports/hampton-university/dp-spt-troy-fullwood-0617-20170616-story.html
  22. Thanks. I left it out to see if anyone other than you would catch it. (That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.)
  23. Even then, the fielder can be "re-protected" once he is in a position to "re-field" the ball (certainly in NCAA; not in FED). And, since the OP said "knocks the ball from the glove" I would assume that either the fielder did not need to move or that he recovered enough to again be protected. I also read the work "knocks" as being some deliberate action by the runner (as opposed to a description of "collided and the ball came out')-- and that's always (?) going to be INT.
  24. Because the inherited count was 2 and 2 the relevant rule is OBR rule 9.16(h)(3): (h) A relief pitcher shall not be held accountable when the first batter to whom he pitches reaches first base on four called balls if such batter has a decided advantage in the ball and strike count when pitchers are changed. (3) If, when pitchers are changed, the count is 2 balls, 2 strikes, 1 ball, 2 strikes, 1 ball, 1 strike, 1 ball, no strike, no ball, 2 strikes, no ball, 1 strike, the official scorer shall charge that batter and the actions of that batter to the relief pitcher. Now you really know which pitcher is responsible for the runner and who will be charged for the run.
  25. FIFY. But I agree: FED doesn't require a quality throw because they don't want fielders throwing at runners. The FED rule can lead to some interesting conversations when enforced correctly after F2 sails a throw into RF.
  26. A protected fielder's protection lasts from the time the ball is batted through his throw, attempted play on a runner, or misplay of the ball. A runner who hinders a protected fielder (contact sufficient but not required) is guilty of INT. A fielder has "misplayed" rather than just "played" a batted ball when he has to move from where he first attempted to play the ball. The OBR standard is a "step and a reach" beyond that location; in FED fielders lose their protection when they "have to move from their original location," though I interpret that by the same standard (step and reach). A fielder without protection who hinders a runner is guilty of OBS. For the OP, it will be umpire judgment whether the fielder is still playing the batted ball (protected) or has misplayed the ball (not protected). The correct ruling on the contact will be entailed by that judgment. It's difficult to assess that judgment call without video, unless the description is really obvious ("he didn't have to move at all, just picked up the ball," or "he had to run about 5 steps to get the misplayed ball"). I agree with johnpatrick's claim that contact during a batted ball is almost never nothing, and thus not incidental contact. Somebody has the right of way there, and the other guy is at fault.
  27. Considering you primarily do squeeze plays with right handed batters for the advantages it provides, specifically because the right handed batter makes a pitch out extremely disadvantageous, and the batter is inherently in the way (much like the inherent advantage to stealing third with a right-handed batter up), common sense would dictate this is nothing 99.9% of the time. Knowing the rule to cite certainly helps, but any coach that makes this argument either doesn't know the game itself, or has no integrity.
  1. Load more activity