Register or Sign In to remove these ads


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

221 Excellent

About Welpe

  • Rank
    Power Tripper

Profile Information

  • Gender Male
  • Location SF Bay Area
  • Interests Spending time with my family, baseball, hockey, football, basketball, reading.

More information about you

  • Occupation Data Geek
  • How did you hear about Umpire-Empire?

Recent Profile Visitors

5,406 profile views
  1. I agree that we should be working to recruit and bring in new blood but we're fighting against the reality that availability is tough at the high school level. I'm one of the youngest guys in my association and I'm approaching my mid-30s. I'm fortunate to have a career that gives me the flexibility to make games that start at 3:30; many younger guys are not that fortunate.
  2. Magic eyeglasses

    I'm not touching this, especially when it comes to eyeglasses. If this becomes a big enough issue, we can run it up through the association or Fed can institute a rule change in 8-10 years.
  3. what is your ruling(s)

    Sorry to drag this up but I'm curious, @grayhawk and @maven, which part of Carl's play do you disagree with? Is it keeping the ball live and ignoring the interference if the ball stays fair?
  4. Gerry Davis poly wools

    Somebody...I think maybe MidAmUmp...said not that long ago that the color of the Davis polywools matched the Honig's ones perfectly.
  5. Congrats maven! Well deserved.
  6. Backswing (followthrough) interference

    It's easier to kill the ball right away if you're just "resetting" everyone. That is perhaps an unintended consequence of the Fed rule in raising the bar for what follow through interference is they are reducing the frequency in when it is called.
  7. NFHS 2016 Baseball Interps

    @noumpere, I think the purpose of Situation 9 is to illustrate that as long as it doesn't extend below the elbow, a solid color isn't required and that Situation 11 is to illustrate that a compression sleeve above the elbow can be white or grey but they also included the black or dark color. Poorly worded to be sure but that seems to be what they are trying to convey.
  8. Backswing (followthrough) interference

    Also known as backswing or weak interference.
  9. 8-4-2f on a force play

    A throw to F4 at 2nd base to retire the runner I take it? If you can find a link to that I'd appreciate it.
  10. 8-4-2f on a force play

    Steve, I very much respect you from your posts both here and on FB so it's given me pause to consider my argument to read your disagreement, believe me. Same with maven. I'll leave this thread be, I appreciate everyone's insight.
  11. Backswing (followthrough) interference

    I agree, my response was to Senor Azul.
  12. 8-4-2f on a force play

    Jeff, I admit that is the way I'm leaning though I'm perhaps less convinced than others. That's one reason why I made this thread so that I could get the opinions of more of my fellow umpires on here that I respect. If I had known beforehand that Steve was @grayhawk, I perhaps wouldn't have.  You know me, I like beating rules to death and to pick them apart. It's the purist rules geek in me, for better or worse. I promise I actually do know how to call a game though this post may cause some (many) to doubt that. I will say this, there are some very good umpires that I respect on both sides of this play.
  13. 8-4-2f on a force play

    One more question then I will leave this alone: That is covered by 8-4-2b is it not? Is there a distinction in your mind between the two rules?
  14. 8-4-2f on a force play

    That is just where this came from but you already knew that. It's always fun making connections between forum members and Facebook group members. And while you consider it a horrifically bad thread, I consider it one that is highly educational in the Fed treatment of interference and the FPSR. Regarding interference with a thrown ball needing to be intentional my contention is "Not always". From the 2007 Interpretations: SITUATION 3: With no outs and R1 on first base, B2 hits a hard ground ball to F6. F6 fields the ball and steps on second base and then throws to first base in an attempt to double up B2. R1 is running standing up in a straight line to second and is hit by F6's throw. R1 was not even half way to second base and did not intentionally interfere with the throw. The defensive coach states that B2 should also be out since R1 violated the force-play slide rule. RULING: This is not a violation of the force play slide rule. R1 cannot be expected to slide at that point in the base path. The play stands. R1 would be out only if he intentionally interfered. (8-4-2b penalty) While the last sentence of the ruling does saying that R1 would only be out if he intentionally interfered, I think this is modified with a salient point: "R1 cannot be expected to slide at that point in the base path." which indicates that there is a point where R1 is expected to slide or otherwise get out of the way. If this weren't true, it'd be superfluous to mention in the ruling so why bother? To take this a step further, what is the point of saying "runner or retired runner" in 8-4-2f?
  15. Backswing (followthrough) interference

    I've gone over that many times in the 2016 book. Still see nothing to return the runners without calling an out.