sdix00

F1 starts and pitches three innings. By the fourth inning, the Head Coach has used all of his Charged Conferences. If the Head Coach were to visit the pitcher, he would be required to replace the pitcher and the replaced pitcher would not be able to pitch again. Instead the Head Coach uses mental telepathy from the dugout, and the pitcher and first baseman swap positions. New pitcher warms up with 8 pitches in one minute. New pitcher pitches to one batter and strikes him out. Then the two players swap positions again and the original pitcher retires the side. Legal?

I found this slide at https://cbuaump.org/2018-2019-nfhs-baseball-rules-pdf page #31 I don't understand why this is illegal. Help? Edit: I meant, why is this illegal by rule? Not necessarily by rationale.

Can someone help me with this? (citation) I am at a tourney and the question came up and I can't seem to find it. Thanks!

I think the FPSR needs to be re-written to be much more clear. The language is ambiguous and spread all throughout the rule book, mixed in with regular runner interference. It is extremely difficult to understand the rule and apply it consistently without a lot of reading of the rule book, case book, mentoring, and trial and error. There are two aspects to the FP/SR: On a Force Play, the regular Slide Rule gets ONE additional requirement -sliding directly into the base. INTERFERENCE on a Force Play (not JUST slides (See CB 8.4.2W, haha)), gets two additional penalties -BR also out,and runners return to TOP (8-4-2b) (different for regular runner interference, which is TOI - (8-2-9)). I could be right, or wrong on the details above, duh, because the rule is hard to understand, duh, but this is how I enforce it, in my games, until I don't. Anyway, IMO, the most confusing rule in the NFHS rule book. The intent of the rule is simple I am sure, but they don't make it easy.

Another vote for the Honigs MLB style shirts. Soft and stretchy. Way better than the burlap sacks they made the Majestics and Smittys from.

I have it. I think it's worth the $30 I spent. I refered to it a lot when I was starting out 5 years ago. I actually copied the flash files to my phone so I could watch them more conventiently. It's more of a reference tool than an instructional source. Especially if you learn visually, or have a hard time visualizing from just text. I have spent thousands learning how to do this job and I have wasted hundreds on garbage materials such as "see a balk call a balk". This $30 was not a waste of money. If I were to prioritize my top few purchases, the virtual umpire camp would not be one of them, however. I would recommend you prioritize your purchanses and do research because I think $30 toward "Maximizing the Two Umpire System" is a much better investment than the Umpire Camp CD. Check out this thread:

I can't believe they feel they need to codify good game management. I'm reading "Rise of the Robots", a book about how technology in on pace to eliminate nearly every job, even the creative jobs. It's happening.

It is my understanding that the ice water towels applied to your core spots (chest, neck, skull, spine) facilitate the transfer of body heat to the surface, then the alcohol component in Florida Water/Spirits/Aftershave/etc evaporates quickly and radiates the heat away. Seems to really help in humid climates where the sweat simply won't evaporate, and instead creates a hot water coat. 99 degrees in Norco, CA yesterday with 42% humidity. I did four games. (I prefer to be one-and-done , but I was helping out). The Ice Towels, Florida Water, and Pickle Juice (for electrolytes) made all the difference.

I'd like to reverse the question and (other than the list above) identify legitimate holes in the 2-man system. Seems like I am discovering them as I go along, but it would be great to hear from the experienced guys about the known, legitimate issues. The reason I ask is because I was at a clinic a few weeks back and the instructor went over a couple legitimate holes in the system and I committed the unpardonable sin of not having pen and paper with me at the time.

I get that folks disagree with me on this one, and I am happy to reconsider. I can't find anything specifically addressing it. But I believe coming set off the rubber with intent to deceive should be penalized and is supported by 8.05g. Here is an older thread worth reviewing. http://www.umpire.org/vb/archive/index.php/t-10682.html Sent from my ASUS_Z00AD using Tapatalk

Coming set off the rubber is a motion associated with the pitch while not engaged. I let it go most of the game because there was no intent and I attributed it to stupid things 12 year olds do. . Once F1 "came set" and snap threw to 3B, I had intent to deceive and the technical ball became a real balk. Sent from my ASUS_Z00AD using Tapatalk

Coming set while off the rubber, of course. Sent from my ASUS_Z00AD using Tapatalk

I had something very similar to this in 12U and I just made a note of it. F1 did it the same thing all game long. Just off the rubber and would bring his hands together for a very long adjustment, then break hands and engage. Then in the 7th, SNAP THROW for a pickoff at 3rd. I balked it, because now I had intent. F1 was setting the runners up all game long. Manager thought about objecting, but when he went to stick his finger at me there was a cookie jar attached.

And yet would be so much easier to list three things the pitcher CAN do instead of 13 things he CAN'T do. :( Sent from my A1-850 using Tapatalk