Jump to content

White47

Established Member
  • Posts

    247
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by White47

  1. maybe I'm wrong, somewhere I think I remember seeing a case play where if you hurdle a non prone defender you are out even if they are obstructing. I
  2. So why don't we follow the same logic if a runner hurdles a defender that is obstructing? Or do we (maybe I'm wrong, somewhere I remember seeing a case play where if you hurdle a non prone defender you are out ) Just doesn't seem like the logic agrees here
  3. not sure if you read my second post which had a little more detail. does that change your mind?
  4. tough call. Definitely out of the running lane, the question here is, is the throw true enough? I'd say yes, but I could also probably, make an argument the other way.
  5. I'm think more along the line of a play at the plate where catcher is blocking without the ball, but the runner come in with an illegal slide. In this case wouldn't they basically be occurring at the same time? sorry for not being to descriptive.
  6. Does an illegal slide (not malicious), superseded obstruction? or should it be called the other way?
  7. Has anyone watched the newest you make the call video. its the one with an obvious OBS at second after a pick off attempt. Am I missing something. Normally there is something somewhat controversial or difficult in these videos. This one seems pretty obvious.
  8. I know it not a force play, but I find easier when talking with casual baseball people ( fans, coaches, even some umpires) to explain it that way. the differences are minuscule, and most will never understand.
  9. last year I had the stomach bug, but didn't come down with it till like an hour before the game ( too late to find a replacement). I called my partner and asked if he'd do the plate. I told the coaches at the meeting. long story short, we had to stop the game multiple times for me to run to the right field corner and throw up. not a good day. I did my best, but I was very sluggish. I didn't get any argument, probably because they felt sorry for me. It was just a like 12 hour bug- I called the next day and felt fine.
  10. that doesn't seem right. Am I missing something?
  11. Runners on second so BU is in C. soft grounder up 1st base line. BR goes out of the base line avoiding F1 tag attempt. Who call is it, or is it just a situation that whoever sees it grabs it? we eventually got together and got it right, but it would have looked alot better if we got while the ball was live. I think we both thought the other was going to call it.
  12. So would this be called the same in Fed?
  13. HR as long as it didn't touch the ground
  14. I would add that one thing to consider is if the ball had passed the fielder, if so, the right to field the ball is no longer valid and OBS should be called.
  15. i looked on the searchable rules on arbiter, but was hyphenation standoff, so it wasn't pulling anything up. And I also didn't really know this was a thing until this year.
  16. What if R3 was way down the line past half way to home (why he would be there IDK), but then interferes could we get two out because it is likely we would be doubled off?
  17. I had it this past weekend in a D3 game, and just told the coaches that they better get them ready to play or I was issuing team warnings... not sure if that is what i should have done or if that has any rule backing. has the NCAA made any rules about stand-offs??
  18. I would say no, especially when looking at the NCAA rule. You may have an argument with the FED rule. BDR says that in FED follow through interference is anything that hinders the actions at home plate. but since this in the collegiate sections I assume you talking about NCAA and it does not have such wording.
  19. In the clip you just watched, which statement is most correct: a. This is not batter's interference because the batter did not swing at the pitch and did not intentionally interfere. b. Although the batter's actions were unintentional, the batter interfered with the catcher’s fielding or throwing by stepping out of the batter’s box. c. Although the batter's action was unintentional, the batter interfered with the catcher’s fielding or throwing; the batter's movement(s) hindered the fielder’s ability to throw the ball to second base from home plate. d. This is not batter's interference because the batter has the right to avoid being hit by a pitch and in this situation in order for there to be batter’s interference, the actions by the batter would have to be intentional. here are the possible answers to the situation. based on the way the possible answers are worded i think its pretty obvious as to what they want us to call her.
  20. B- no one was hindered. follow threw Interference only applies when it hinders the actions at home plate
  21. good point I've looked and couldn't find anything. beside common scene, what rule backing do we have to call it this way?? as you know, the Rule book doesn't often include common scene.
  22. So he is wanting RLI called even if it doesn't hinder anything??? That's Bad...
  23. yea I'm defiantly not saying he was wrong, especially at game speed with no replay, And I'm still 60/40 ( interference) on the situation and I've watched it several times.
  24. Maybe I'm just not understand what your say here, but isn't the rule that if RLI is called runners return to TOP?
  25. Anyone watched the new Brainshark video on arbiter? If you haven't I'll try to explain the situation. Right hander in the box, with runner on first. Pitcher delivers a inside pitch that the batter has to avoid so it doesn't hit him. in doing so he get off balance and strep over the plate where he hinders the catcher with his attempt to throw out R! stealing. In the video the PU called interference, and on first watched I agreed. Then I watched it again and I'm not so sure. they are not publishing there official ruling until march first. Watch do y'all think?
×
×
  • Create New...