Register or Sign In to remove these ads


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

11 Neutral

About roothog66

More information about you

  • How did you hear about Umpire-Empire?
    High School Baseball Web

Recent Profile Visitors

675 profile views
  1. May have been a glitch. Just a few minutes ago, when trying to get to that forum, I got a message saying I didn't have permission to view that thread. It works now, though.
  2. I had started a thread in this forum concerning the Georgia incident. It was locked down because it was being discussed elsewhere and a link to that thread included. I participated a couple of times, but since am told I don't have permission to enter that thread and the link is likewise gone. So, does this mean since I don't have permission to enter the "Umpire News" thread, this an't be discussed on this forum by non-umpire participants?
  3. So, waiting on some actual grounds for ruling on the appeal. It appears they either ruled that they are convinced the umps made the wrong call and are willing to make an unprecedented decision (which would have to be made on an inappropriate use of an unclear video) or decided that, in this case the rule was just too unfair and they would ignore it. Either way this opens up a Pandora's box of BS.
  4. So the GHSA overturned the game on the walk-off walk. There will now be a game #3. While the original call may have been BS, it was a judgment call and by the book. GHSA appears to have completely lost their minds and ignored process. If I were an ump, I'd bee a little upset.
  5. Interesting this video is here. We had this in a game Saturday and I was going to bring it up here. Ours was very much like this. Runner on third and the pitcher did the same thing only the catcher caught the ball. The umpires decided it was nothing and just called "no-pitch." My argument was that any motion made by the pitcher while not in contact with the rubber that mimics his pitching motion is an illegal pitch and subject to penalty. They did not agree. Since our batter put the next pitch over the left field fence, there was no lingering argument.
  6. I'm going to guess that it was a jab-step. webspinnre, if you're around, was it?
  7. Hah! For years I ran a professional sports photography company. In 2003, I was working the American Legion Florida State Championship game. I was standing behind first base. With a tie game in the top of the ninth, two out and a runner on third, there was a throw that pulled the first baseman off the bag. He made a swipe tag. The ump called him safe, ruling he missed the tag. This was my very first time out with a new Nikon D1 digital camera - my first experience with being able to review photos instantly. I had a beautiful shot of an obvious tag by F3. After the arguing dies down, I proudly showed the shot one of the coaches who was outside the first base dugout. He snatched the camera out of my hands, rushed to the PU and started arguing and shoving my camera in his face. The umpire then ejected ME off the field. I learned my lesson early on and never again showed a coach any shot during a game.
  8. I only mentioned it because "disengage" is how the OP described it. If he's asking if you can "disengage" from the front, then, no, you can't. As to the post I was quoting, I just wanted to clarify that his use of the term "disengage" shouldn't be confused with the wording "disengage" as used in the rule books.
  9. I think the confusion comes in that this (step in front and spin to second) isn't considered "disengaging" anymore than the jab step pick to first.
  10. I think the added comment makes it clear that the umpire is to make the judgment based on the physical actions of a runner. In reality, a runner who is "feinting" with no intention of actually making a move on second base is physically applying the exact same actions as a runner who, as BalkHawk puts, has an "Oh SH*#" moment. I would have to believe that the wording "creates the impression" encompasses both actions in a way meant to imply that either action brings the exception into play. This removes from the umpire's responsibility the almost impossible job of reading a runners mind to determine if he were actually intending to make an advance and aborting the move or only feinting. In fact, the definition of feint is: " a movement made in order to deceive an adversary; an attack aimed at one place or point merely as a distraction from the real place or point of attack." In other words, a feint is an attempt to create a particular impression that is not a true attempt but intended, nevertheless, to convey the impression as if it were a true attempt.
  11. I would say that under OBR, even a feint makes the move legal. Rule 8.05(d) Comment: When determining whether the pitcher throws or feints a throw to an unoccupied base for the purpose of making a play, the umpire should consider whether a runner on the previous base demonstrates or otherwise creates an impression of his intent to advance to such unoccupied base. A feint would be demonstrating "an impression of his intent" to steal. That's sort of the definition of "feint."
  12. I'm with you here, which is why I hate Comment 8.05(b): (b) With a runner on first base the pitcher may make a complete turn, without hesitating toward first, and throw to second. This is not to be interpreted as throwing to an unoccupied base. This comment seems not to recognize the exception at all, but instead apply some off the wall reasoning that makes second now occupied. The reason it's not a balk isn't because it shouldn't be "interpreted as throwing to an unoccupied base." Of course, he's throwing to an unoccupied base! It's not a balk because of the exception to the rule.
  13. At the younger youth ages where teams turn it into a track meet by stealing on every pitch, I often used this as gamble. At those ages, the steal rates approach 100% and there is very little risk. You don't have to do it very often and, even if the runner doesn't go and there's a balk committed, it certainly gets into the head of whoever is calling for steals and cuts out the "steal on every pitch mentality." At older ages, the risk starts to outweigh the reward and I only very occasionally used it when either I had stolen the signs or had an exceptionally good base stealer that I thought was almost surely going on the first pitch and would almost surely be successful. The other situation is 3-2 count, 2 outs and I've noticed a team has a tendency to take off at first movement. It's often argued that this is a bush move. However, I only see it as giving the RHP same advantage that a lefty has. With a lefty on the mound, the runner has to either wait for the pitcher to start towards the plate at which point he is committed to pitch or take a gamble and go on first movement. The inside move by the righty only puts the runner in the same place hi is with a lefty. Now, in case the OP is thinking about trying to teach his pitchers to start their motion and then decide on whether to pitch or move inside - forget it. It's almost impossible to teach. Just stick with taking a guess and going for it. At youth levels, if you're wrong, you just give up second which was probably going to happen on the next pitch, anyway.
  14. Actually, at older ages, I only did it on occasions where I stole signs which rarely happened more than once before signs got better. Often at 12u and (more often) below you have runners take off and steal on practically every pitch. Do this once or twice and they stop even if they catch you with a balk once the oppo coach understands that this is legal. They still steal, but get a little more cautious. I actually rarely did this after 11u. I did try to teach making the adjustment on the fly and it was more difficult and affected the pitch way to much to be useful.
  15. While it is difficult to execute for an F1 when it is a reaction, it's quite easy to do as a "guess." My pitchers used this extensively in youth ball. It's a risk. If you guess right, you get the pickoff. At any rate, even a failed attempt was quite effective at stopping the track meet mentality at youth ages where the runners automatically take off on every pitch. At older ages, it's impractical, however. You also run into umpires at younger ages that either don't understand the "to make a play" exception or have misinterpreted it with anything from an idea that the runner has to have taken off before the pitcher begins his motion or some idea that he has to be "half way." However, a lot more umpires than you would think understand it perfectly. Very few coaches do, though. So, lots of arguments.