Jump to content

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member

Jimurray

Established Member
  • Content count

    3,817
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Posts posted by Jimurray


  1. 47 minutes ago, Richvee said:

    I have to question the validity of this statement.

    If, as in the J/R  interp's example, "The batter takes two or three steps backwards during the pitch"....., he is no longer in a legal batting position. He'd be out of the box and even if he threw the bat at the ball and made contact it would be an illegally batted ball.

    Can a catcher actually interfere with a batter who is illegally trying to bat a ball?

    On the other side of the coin, I agree... how do you call a "pitch" that hasn't reached the strike zone because F2 stepped up and caught it before it got there?

    This play seems to be catcher interference with a pitch more than catcher interference with a batter.

     

    I think the pitch could be called a ball by definition. I lean towards CI for any move over HP but real world has it not called even with batters in the box with bat on their shoulder. Two triple steals in NCAA might actually have been CI


  2. 20 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

    Reading through the MLBUM I saw some clarifications on the windup that I don't recall seeing in the OBR. I'd like to read your thoughts on one of them in particular:

    On (2), am I reading it correctly that minus a quick pitch scenario, the pitcher is permitted to keep his hands separate and deliver a legal pitch to the batter.

    Or am I misreading it? 

    Thanks! 

    windup.jpg

    With hands apart he can start a windup or he can just rare back and throw. Strop and others do that occasionally. Sometimes they get dinged for QP and sometimes not. MLB has eliminated the question of what a sideways pitcher is going to do but I'm waiting for a loophole to be taken advantage of. R3, sideways F1 declares windup, R3 thinks he can steal HP on the windup but F1 just throws home without winding up. 


  3. 1 hour ago, Matt said:

    I would be surprised if the rules committee adopted the windup rule recommendation. It not only is as restrictive as FED for foot position but also restricts the chest position. Many pitchers like to start with hybrid body angle and can adjust their feet to comply with the FED foot position. The NCAA recommendation would even eliminate that. 

     


  4. 54 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

    But if you have a balk, you should call a balk at the time of the balk yes? Perhaps it is the base umpire? 

    A balk is always called when it happens or you process it. Time is called as per MLBUM. Less than 2 out, not a ball 4 or strike 3 pitch, R1 stealing on a wild pitch with a balk called, F2 throws R1 out at 3B. You confirm R3 is out, acknowledge the "no pitch" and reset the count and await your discussion with the offensive manager.


  5. 1 hour ago, johnnyg08 said:

    That works. Thanks! 

    Since we're going there would it make more sense to acknowledge, the enforce or disregard? 

    Thinking that we should always acknowledge it if we're going to enforce or disregard?

    Your thoughts? 

    Acknowledgement would only happen on a wild pitch where R1, lets say, advanced to 2B safely or 3B safely or thrown out. You acknowledge the balk for the batter.


  6. 22 minutes ago, mwest5575 said:

    I'm not being argumentative and understand what the manual says, but the rule doesn't say "because" of ball four (or at least not the rule that was posted on this page). So it seems like the manual is changing the rule to me. Result of the pitch was that the batter reached first and all other runners did in fact advance a base. The rule doesn't require it's because of the base on balls does it? I would definitely have made the "mistake" of letting it go without enforcing the balk but I'm just confused why the manual seems to add requirements that the rulebook doesn't?

    ETA: Is it because once the catcher catches the pitch the play is "over" as opposed to if it's a wild pitch or put in play? So what if the pitch hits the dirt and bounces off the catcher out in front of the plate? If the catcher picks it up before the runner reaches third it's a balk and if he doesn't then you ignore the balk?

    For the bolded, considered as a WP, the interp says the umpire "shall not call "Time"
    until all play has ceased (runners have stopped trying to advance and an fielder is in
    possession of the ball in the infield)." 


  7. 11 hours ago, kylehutson said:

    No shame in admitting you're wrong.

    Insisting you're still right on the other hand...

    My goal is just to not make the same mistake twice!

    Literal reading of only the rule would not have you wrong and probably nobody would blink an eye if you left R2 at 3B. The MLBUM wording of "actual pitch" and the #5 "unless all runners advance one base because of ball four" wording are what clarifies the rule but not every umpire knows to buy an MLBUM or MilBUM every year or two. I wonder if this is even covered in any amateur OBR/NCAA clinics? 


  8. 2 hours ago, kylehutson said:

    Since I posted earlier in the thread, I got it in my email. Thank you for that.

    Apparently I was, indeed, wrong. I hate when that happens. @BlueMagic - listen to what they said instead of me.

    You're gonna have to tell @MadMax to only like the first sentence of your post also:D

    • Haha 1

  9. 19 hours ago, BlueMagic said:

    Is there anywhere I can find a concise summary of the MLB balk rule? I’m used to Fed rules and am unsure about the offensive team’s options under the MLB balk rule.

    Scenario: Runner on first. 3-0 count on batter. Balk called, pitch is delivered and it’s ball four. Does the batter return with a 3-0 count with the runner now on 2nd, or does he get to take the result of the pitch and the base on balls?

    This is not concise but it is a good summary from PBUC/MLBUM courtesy of @noumpere. Second page, fourth post down.

     


  10. 14 hours ago, kylehutson said:

    So in your particular case, the result of the play is that the batter and the only baserunner *did* advance one base, so the balk is ignored.

    If that runner had been on 2nd base instead of first, we still let the play run through. If R2 (the runner who started on 2nd) advanced to 3rd*, then the balk is ignored. But if R2 is still standing on 2nd, the result of the play is that we enforce the balk - so R2 goes to 3rd, the batter goes back to the plate with a 3-0 count.

    *which often happens when a balk is called - the runner will advance and the defense will not attempt to get the out, not realizing that they can - not that it will affect the baserunner (he still gets 3rd), but that it will affect the batter.

    Your R2 Sit is incorrect unless it is ball four wild pitch.  @noumpere posted the MLBUM when to call time verbiage a while ago. He might want to repost it in this thread. 


  11. 9 hours ago, BlueMagic said:

    Thank you.

    Don’t thank him. He got it wrong with R2 unless it was ball four wild pitch. The MLBUM has a section on when to call time on a balk. With R2 and a caught ball 4 you call time when the pitch is caught by the catcher. The balk is enforced and R2 is awarded  3B and the batter stays at the plate with 3 balls. 

    • Like 1

  12. 1 hour ago, crussellii said:

    Coaching my 13 year old team in tournament today our team playing defense, R1 only PU announces Balk, batter hits grounder threw F5 as everyone freezes. F7 throws ball back into F6, to F1. OBR rules, PU tells coach he gets choice of play or balk. Of course he takes play now has R2 and R1. I didn’t think coach had option on Balks. If BR was put out then balk would have be applied. Since BR reached safely, no balk on play. What is correct ruling on this? First time I’ve had this occur coaching and fist year umpiring. 

    Contgratulations!  This may be your first year umpiring but you have achieved a level of understanding of the OBR balk rule beyond the comprehension of some multi year umpires. It also is within the comprehension of many other umpires but they don't care to make the effort to learn the rules. You will have to tread lightly among your unknowing cohorts and may have to grin and bear it. You have the correct ruling. 


  13. On July 14, 2018 at 8:16 PM, Guest Mitch said:

    Runner on first is stealing second.  Batter swings on the pitch and crosses the plate.  Catcher makes the throw but doesn't touch the batter.  Is the runner out?

    Is it possible that the catcher came up throwing in the opposite batters box to avoid the batter attempting to interfere? Catchers do that in leagues with umpires that have no training or ganas to call BI. It would be BI


  14. 5 minutes ago, stkjock said:

    Since it’s ball 4 doesn’t the batter become a BR and can be put our on appeal to first for not legally acquiring the base?

    I think he can be put out for missing it but how would this be appealed? He has all the time in the world to touch 1B. There is an esoteric desertion out if he doesn't and enters the dugout. To me it's game over as it would be on ball 3. 


  15. 1 hour ago, noumpere said:

    Because the rule says “refuses to advance.”  That implies a direction that is not followed

    Doesn't the rule apply only with bases loaded? I don't see why we would require the batter to go to 1B with only R3


  16. 1 hour ago, MadMax said:

    So this would be one of those rare “4th Out” calls?

    The Rule has it that we (Umpires) call an Out for Assistance, but leave the ball Live (atypical for most HS calls). So, with it being 3rd Out, provided that R3 had crossed the HP prior to the Assistance on R2, that Run would score.

    If however, the defense figures out the reason for the Assistance was the missed 3B (and that an Umpire saw it, too), the defense can just conduct a verbal Dead-ball appeal (these are Fed Rules, after all) and the Run is taken off the board... right?

    So how do we convey this to the coach(es) and scorekeeper (in the most concise way possible)?

    If you are dealing with an MLB scorekeeper when the assist took place at HP you would not have to indicate anything. Watch the run get put up and then taken down just on the out for assist with no appeal: http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/9780550/v11487843/must-c-curious-morgan-out-at-home-for-contact


  17. 9 minutes ago, noumpere said:

    A runner is considered to have touched the base when he passes it, until there's an appeal.

     

    The out for assistance is not a force out.  If the defense appeals, it becomes a force out.

    FED calls the runner out and does not score the run  without an appeal at HP. I think the same thing happened in the MLB play. Are we treating HP different that the other bases? In most cases the physical assist is successful and the runner will have touched while he is out. Do we require the defense to know that that touch was not legal? 


  18. So we have this FED interp,  "SITUATION 11: On a base hit to the outfield, the runner from third base comes home but misses touching home plate. The on-deck batter physically stops him and shoves him back to the plate, where he then touches it. RULING:Physical assistance by a teammate is not allowed unless both players are viable runners. The assisted runner is out and his run does not count. (2-21-1c, 5-1-2f, 3-2-2),"

    and an MLB occurrence where a runner missed HP and was called out for coach assist. The runner now is out and cannot legally correct his miss even if he did get pushed back to the plate. But it appears FED and OBR/MLB doesn't require an appeal of missing HP to not score the run. 

    What if we had bases loaded with 2 outs and an extra base hit. R3 scores while R2 misses 3B while rounding it and the coach physically grabs him to push him back to 2B. The ump calls R2 out for the third out. Do we require an appeal of the miss to unscore the run or do we consider it an out on a forced runner.

×