Jump to content

Register or Sign In to remove these ads
  • 0
stkjock

RLI Called in LLWS Regional Maryland vs DC

Question

stkjock    272

I realize a single image is hard to use for this call, I don't have a video at this time, it happened maybe 5 mins ago in the game.

Situation, 2 out, R3, DK3 - RLI called, no run scores.  

the runner ran then entire way in the position (relative to the foul line) he's in near the bag. Thrown ball from F2 hits runner in the back/side. I think it's the correct call, the thought that jumped to the front of my mind, is BR close enough to the bag that his position at this time would allow him to be judged in a legal spot?

 

The image shows the runner and the ball just before they arrive at the base the second image has a highlight arrow to show the ball's position.

RLI.jpg

 

replay available on ESPN now:

play occurs at 50:00

http://www.espn.com/watch/player?bucketId=2&id=3134624

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

46 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
JSam21    113
19 hours ago, grayhawk said:

I think it was the correct call. That was a catchable throw if it hadn't hit the runner in the back while he was out of the lane.  Could a throw more to the outside have retired the runner?  Yes.  The bottom line is that the throw was catchable, and the runner was out of the lane all the way down.  Run in the lane, and you protect yourself from being called for it.  

I'm with you... Chest high throw within the frame of the defender doesn't really get much more quality than that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Register or Sign In to remove these ads
  • 0
Rich Ives    956
11 hours ago, BrianC14 said:

I'm not sure comparing LL to MLB is the appropriate way to be judging this, especially when judging the quality of the throw.  

Aren't we umpires supposed to be officiating to the level of the game?   It's not as though the throw was air mailed or in the dirt....

Just my  $0.02.

LL says you need a catchable throw too.

How can you interfere with catching a throw that isn't catchable?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Thunderheads    2,363
35 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

This is a pretty easy call. I'm not even saying that the kid did anything intentional. He violated...sure. For every time is has been called on him there's probably another 50 times where he ended up on 2b or 3b due to one of our brethren not calling it for a multitude of reasons. 

As a coach...it's very easy to teach your kids....run to first base in the runner's lane. 

Wouldn't that be one of the easiest things a coach could teach a baseball player? 

 

 

 

obviously not .........  look at the MLB! :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
johnnyg08    1,498
7 minutes ago, stkjock said:

Johnny - I think you're giving to much credit to a 12 yo player

Perhaps...I'll err all day on a kid making a mistake because they're kids. (Doesn't mean I'm not going to make a call)

I have less patience with adults. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
BrianC14    422
59 minutes ago, Rich Ives said:

LL says you need a catchable throw too.

How can you interfere with catching a throw that isn't catchable?

 

The throw that F2 made was most certainly catchable.  Interps also mention "quality".  I would expect a higher level of quality at MLB than at LL.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Jimurray    544
51 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

This is a pretty easy call. I'm not even saying that the kid did anything intentional. He violated...sure. For every time is has been called on him there's probably another 50 times where he ended up on 2b or 3b due to one of our brethren not calling it for a multitude of reasons. 

As a coach...it's very easy to teach your kids....when you drop a bunt near HP or up the 1B line or when there is a DTK run to first base in the runner's lane.....Otherwise run directly to 1B.

Wouldn't that be one of the easiest things a coach could teach a baseball player? 

 

 

 

Added red to your post. Well if we can't get rid of the rule why don't we correct another part of it's anachronism? Let's line up the lane with the base. It was in line with the base until they relocated the base inside. Just that would eliminate some controversial calls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
stkjock    272
14 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

Perhaps...I'll err all day on a kid making a mistake because they're kids. (Doesn't mean I'm not going to make a call)

I have less patience with adults. 

Not that is should effect making the call or not..  my thinking is two fold, in my experience, most LL fields do not have a runners lane chalked/painted, it's not something they are used to, in the 6 years I've been involved in LL baseball, as a coach and parent, I've never once heard a coach talk about using the RL.  So the kids just don't know any better for the most part IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
johnnyg08    1,498
Just now, stkjock said:

Not that is should effect making the call or not..  my thinking is two fold, in my experience, most LL fields do not have a runners lane chalked/painted, it's not something they are used to, in the 6 years I've been involved in LL baseball, as a coach and parent, I've never once heard a coach talk about using the RL.  So the kids just don't know any better for the most part IMHO.

For sure. Some MLB managers/players don't know all of the rules, we certainly can't expect folks at the amateur levels to understand RLI. The first few times I called it in my games they burned the damn fields down. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Jimurray    544
23 hours ago, stkjock said:

funny thing to me after I watched it again, had he run in the lane, the results IMHO would have been the same, yet he'd have been in compliance and not been called for RLI.

After finally viewing the video, you could make the case for him establishing his position IN the lane late about 10' - 15'  from 1B. You might even suspect that the reason he drifted to running in the lane at that point was his view of where F3 was and that might affect F3 negatively. But his intent would not matter. He was in the lane and exited in the last step or two to touch 1B. Thus he was in compliance. He did not run to 1B all the way out of the lane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
stl_ump    90
On 8/8/2017 at 11:51 AM, JonnyCat said:

Love the soccer flop. Did you notice the kids reaction when he got called out?

He's rolling on the ground in agony and when he hears the call he all of a sudden stops and is like "What?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
catsbackr    376
On 8/8/2017 at 0:28 PM, Jimurray said:

High school umpires would also probably not call RLI on that also. 

Jim,

 

Are you saying HS umpires would not call RLI on a runner, out of the runner's lane, that is hit by the throw?

 

Why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Jimurray    544
19 minutes ago, catsbackr said:

Jim,

 

Are you saying HS umpires would not call RLI on a runner, out of the runner's lane, that is hit by the throw?

 

Why?

When the throw crosses the foul line we normally wouldn't call RLI when the runner was out of the running  lane but also out of the actual throwing lane: 

2004 Interps

SITUATION 19: B1 bunts and F2 fields the ball in fair territory in front of home plate. B1 is running in foul territory when F2, in fair territory, throws errantly and hits B1 in the back. B1 continues running and touches first base. RULING: The play stands. F2 made an errant throw. Although B1 was not in the running lane, his position did not interfere with F2’s throw. (8-4-1g Exception)

But the OP has the runner so close to 1B so you would have to judge whether it was an errant throw that hit the runner or a catchable throw.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
BrianC14    422
5 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

When the throw crosses the foul line we normally wouldn't call RLI when the runner was out of the running  lane but also out of the actual throwing lane: 

2004 Interps

SITUATION 19: B1 bunts and F2 fields the ball in fair territory in front of home plate. B1 is running in foul territory when F2, in fair territory, throws errantly and hits B1 in the back. B1 continues running and touches first base. RULING: The play stands. F2 made an errant throw. Although B1 was not in the running lane, his position did not interfere with F2’s throw. (8-4-1g Exception)

But the OP has the runner so close to 1B so you would have to judge whether it was an errant throw that hit the runner or a catchable throw.

And the emphasis I made in red makes the OP a wholly different situation from the Sit. 19 here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Rich Ives    956
5 hours ago, BrianC14 said:

The throw that F2 made was most certainly catchable.  Interps also mention "quality".  I would expect a higher level of quality at MLB than at LL.

 

Actually the quality has to be better at LL because the target (fielder at 1B) is smaller.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
UMP45    299
On 8/8/2017 at 0:28 PM, Jimurray said:

High school umpires would also probably not call RLI on that also. 

Why do you say that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Jimurray    544
31 minutes ago, UMP45 said:

Why do you say that?

 

When the throw crosses the foul line we normally wouldn't call RLI when the runner was out of the running  lane but also out of the actual throwing lane: 

"2004 Interps

SITUATION 19: B1 bunts and F2 fields the ball in fair territory in front of home plate. B1 is running in foul territory when F2, in fair territory, throws errantly and hits B1 in the back. B1 continues running and touches first base. RULING: The play stands. F2 made an errant throw. Although B1 was not in the running lane, his position did not interfere with F2’s throw. (8-4-1g Exception)"

But the OP has the runner so close to 1B so you would have to judge whether it was an errant throw that hit the runner or a catchable throw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
BrianC14    422
2 hours ago, Rich Ives said:

Actually the quality has to be better at LL because the target (fielder at 1B) is smaller.

The throw in the OP was right to F3, and catchable.  That is,  until BR ran into F3 (first contact was with his mitt).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Jimurray    544
10 minutes ago, BrianC14 said:

The throw in the OP was right to F3, and catchable.  That is,  until BR ran into F3 (first contact was with his mitt).  

You would agree that would be legal had the BR been established running in the lane and only exited to touch 1B?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
BrianC14    422
1 hour ago, Jimurray said:

You would agree that would be legal had the BR been established running in the lane and only exited to touch 1B?

[Yes, he WOULD have been legal, but the issue arose for BR when he was never in the lane.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Jimurray    544
13 minutes ago, BrianC14 said:

[Yes, he WOULD have been legal, but the issue arose for BR when he was never in the lane.  

I'm of the opinion that he established legal running in the lane and exited legally. But it's an interesting question that the same throw could be called two different ways on a throw that crossed the foul line. Of course, on a normal inside to inside play, the action of where the runner ran makes a difference using current interps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×