Jump to content

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member

umpire_scott

Established Member
  • Content Count

    1,310
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

umpire_scott last won the day on July 31 2016

umpire_scott had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

97 Neutral

More information about you

  • Your Association Name
    Missouri High School Athletic Association
  • How did you hear about Umpire-Empire?
    Search Engine (Google, Yahoo, Bing, ...)

Recent Profile Visitors

4,099 profile views
  1. A lot of umpires confuse the CI and balk rules. CI gives the coach the choice this balk does not. But 99% of coaches are going to take the result of the play (since all runners and the batter are advancing) and ignore the balk, so it never gets pointed out.
  2. We use OBR rules. And I don't believe the Wendelstedt interp listed is relevant. Runners who steal on ball 4 are also entitled to the base. I need the interp about balks and runners stealing not CI and runners stealing.
  3. So I had a situation a few years ago where R2 was stealing on the play (no other runners), pitcher balks and it is ball 4 on the batter. I thought that since the BR advanced on ball 4 and R2 advanced on the steal that the balk would not be enforced. But an experienced umpire told me that actually that situation was covered in an interpretations manual and because R2 stealing was independent of the pitched ball that the balk would be enforced. Basically the interpretation being that BR and all runners had to advance as a result of the pitch. So our UIC sent around a rules test in preparation or our upcoming clinics. In the sitch he sent around it was all the same except instead of it being ball 4 it was catcher's interference. To me since in CI R2 would not get third base, unless he successfully completed the steal these two scenarios are exactly the same. Yet our rules test answer said that the balk would not be enforced because BR and all runners advanced a base.
  4. umpire_scott

    Balk Rule

    Agreed. I didn't think it was a balk.
  5. umpire_scott

    Balk Rule

    I think what made it peculiar looking was the sloppiness and methodical nature of the move. The kid was very slow in going from moving his pivot foot to then stepping towards first. It just looked funky.
  6. umpire_scott

    Balk Rule

    Was doing a 10U select tourney over the weekend. Had a kid do something peculiar on the mound (what a shock). In attempting a pick off to first base he slid his pivot foot slightly forward and slightly towards third base then turned his body and stepped towards first base to throw. As it was 10U we did not balk it. My partner and I talked about it afterwards. I was not sure it was a balk. He indicated it was because his first move was with his pivot foot and it wasn't backwards off the pitching plate. (A) Is this accurate? (B) what rule verbiage supports this? I looked in 2018 OBR handbook and could not find verbiage to support this. I thought it looked clunky and sloppy, but wasn't sure that it was a balk.
  7. So in my case F3 never contacted BR. The throw came in high and wide and BR kind of ducked to avoid F3 and the ball. In ducking he lost his balance and lunged forward a little and his back foot came off the bag. It was a strange play in that by what I saw he was not planning on running through the base, he was planning on stopping at the base. He had slowed down to do so. But when he noticed F9 throwing to F3 he ducked to get out of the way of the throw and this caused him to come off the back of the base. I guess I was asking if he gets any extra protection being that he is able to overrun first base.
  8. 12U baseball. Ball hit to right field. BR running down the line sees it will be an easy base hit slows up as if to stop at the base. The RF throws to first and the throw pulls F3 off the base and causes BR to lose his balance so he touches the base and then stumbles forward off of it. At what point is he liable to be put out for coming off the base versus legally overrunning it?
  9. So normally with R2 doesn't PU have the touch at third for example if the play had been at first rather than a tag up the line? I ask because I have run into this before when I was in C and a dribbler was hit down the first base line. I went towards the working area to get a good look at a play at first. Well my PU, partner went up the line as well, and before I noticed and turned around there was a collision rounding third between R2 and F5. Neither of us saw it as we both went towards the play at first. We talked about it later and I pregame now that 1/2 way up the line PU has tag and after that BU has it. Do any of you do anything different to avoid that SH*# sandwich?
  10. So clearly this is a judgement call on whether the umpire would consider it preparatory or not. Even though he was deliberate in his motions and did look in, since he was not taking a sign, and he paused for a long time after switching hands, I considered it preparatory.
  11. FWIW in my situation in the OP, the opposing HC, who was at 3rd base questioned the non-call of the balk. He called time and went to my partner behind the plate. I was not in earshot to hear what was said. My partner then said that the coach could come talk to me if he wanted to. The coach came out and said "you know that is a balk when they switch hands like that". I explained I felt it fell under "momentary adjustment while getting settled". He mumbled something about that being a balk every time in high school. We played on. He made some snide comments about it while warming his pitcher up the next inning, but we moved past it. Then later in the game, because this was now in the pitchers head about not being able to switch hands, he switched hands and then switched back, while engaged with the plate. At this point I balked it. As for it not creating an advantage I think it could a little because the motion of switching hands can be construed by the runner as beginning to come set. He may extend his lead at this point. This could make him vulnerable to get picked off. In addition, if he realizes F1 simply switched hands, he may reduce his lead and throw his timing off for a potential steal. Many umpires I work with have this notion that almost anything a pitcher does prior to becoming set is legal and can't be balked. In fact when I talked to some of my colleagues, the first thing out of many of their mouths was, "well it was before he came set, right". Which in this case was irrelevant.
  12. Thanks for all the input. It was probably a little of "had to be there". I would say the "looking in/taking a sign" could have been judged differently by different umpires. The kid was pretty deliberate in his motion, so it was probably right on the border of what one would consider "getting settled".
  13. The game in question was 11U baseball. He was not taking a sign. The cases stated were FED and this was an OBR game. Do most of you call it differently depending on the rule set?
  14. I had nothing on the first and I balked the second. We have a 9-year MiLB umpire in our association he said "no" on the first. I was not able to ask him yet about the second.
  15. In the second situation he switched hands twice.
×
×
  • Create New...