Jump to content

Jimurray

Established Member
  • Posts

    6,438
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    60

Jimurray last won the day on March 15

Jimurray had the most liked content!

2 Followers

Recent Profile Visitors

16,711 profile views

Jimurray's Achievements

1.5k

Reputation

7

Community Answers

  1. That's an easy "time, pinch runner for him" chew his asss in the dugout" no ejection neccessary. But some college coaches have no gonads any more.
  2. If the PU was more animated and verbal to keep the plate visible I could see some post game ejections for unsportsmanlike conduct, ignoring the umpire's direction. You might even make a case for telling the coach the game is not over yet until I see your winning run touch or pass HP. That was an example of college players disrespecting an umpire and something should be done about it. Meanwhile the base umps hopefully got their base touches while also focusing on any runner celebrating in an unsportsmanlike manner. Segueing, college chapters should tell the NCAA umpire hierachy that they will not be birddogging stuff that college coaches should be controlling. If an ensuing HBP or brawl happens fine and discipline the teams, players, coaches. I know, the guys need the paycheck so that won't happen.
  3. If you are willing to address catch nets and yellow lines and padding also you have my vote. When is the next election?
  4. Before MLB codified the DP slide the takeout slide was allowed at the forced base even when the slide was started after the out and with the intent of affecting the pivot man. Are you saying every one of those should have been INT?
  5. I would like to use intent (as evidenced by a smirk or such) to call INT. But continuing to run or slide after being out is allowed. In fact Wendelstedt said, before OBR codified DP slides, that "that act alone" of sliding and taking out the fielder when you were already out was allowed by that rule wording. They also allow a B-R to continue to run though 1B after a fly foul is caught and if hit by a throw, lets say from just beyond 1B to double up or get a tagging R3, there is no INT if the runner was running out the play normally or, as clarified with a change, running in one direction or the other that would be normal baserunning.
  6. Have you perused the whole thread and still don't understand that only a step is required in a feint to a base in all three codes?
  7. FED and, currently, Wendelstedt don't need any context other than a no sht fly ball out or an out call by an ump. Given those the defense is responsible to know who is out. Earlier NCAA and OBR opinions would have you judge intent to draw a play by the runner who knew he was out.
  8. From what I remember, while a shoulder turn alone in FED is called a balk, in OBR there is no prohibition to turn the shoulder in a look at 1B unless the ump judges it as a feint. A slow turn including shoulder would not be called.
  9. The shoulder would have to be part of that thrust.
  10. Probably the primary reason why NCAA changed their catcher's box rule.
  11. The rules require further study of how to interpret them and you and your cohorts seem to be avid readers of the rules but the people training you have not delved beyond their literal meaning to interps and caseplays that help you apply the rules. key in @The Man in Blue
  12. Off topic, this is also a misconception of yours. "Immediately" is not a requirement.
  13. No, by NFHS definition a feint is the start of a throw which would be the step. 2002 interps “SITUATION 9: With runners on first and third bases, the pitcher is in the set position. The pitcher then attempts the third-to-first pick-off move by stepping towards third base, and turning around and throwing to first. The third-base coach claims this is a balk since the pitcher, in his feint to third, only stepped toward third with no arm movement. RULING: This pick-off move is legal. A feint is a movement that simulates the start of a pitch or a throw to a base. Arm movement by a pitcher during a feint is not mandatory. (2-28-5)”
  14. Do know of a code where arm movement is required? If so would you mind giving us the cite. All of your cites are legal feints that include arm action. None of your cited infer that arm motion is required. Nothing is required other than a step in any code including FED. I’ll follow up later with FED caseplay or interp that makes this clear.
×
×
  • Create New...