Jump to content

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member

ricka56

Established Member
  • Content count

    2,844
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    34

ricka56 last won the day on April 8

ricka56 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,121 Excellent

About ricka56

  • Rank
    what ? me worry ?
  • Birthday 04/01/2001

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Bearded Clam, MA

Recent Profile Visitors

8,904 profile views
  1. ricka56

    Force Play

    My electrical engineering job sometimes had me measuring events in nanoseconds/picoseconds. That's 0.00000000001 seconds. The naked eye can only distinguish events 0.01 seconds part (if one's really good). Though an umpire may not be able to distinguish the timing of a REAL REAL banger like an oscilloscope can, the chances of a play at 1B being a tie (in picoseconds) is VERY small. When you're got a true baseball banger, it may look like a tie, but it ain't. Either the umpire (or replay official) nailed the call, or they didn't. Pitchers miss their spots, batters swing and miss, fielders boot grounders or throw the balls away, and umpires (replay officials) miss calls...get over it, buttercup.
  2. ricka56

    Is the game over?

    This Ask the Umpire question would make sense with the following corrections: Runners on the corners with 1 out. Batter hits a fly ball to right, which is caught. Runner at 3rd tags up legally and scores. However, the batter runner on first never re-touches first base. He just walks into the dugout. Is the game really over at this point? Doesn't the batter runner on first have to complete the play and re-touch first base? And the answer would be, yes, the game is over even if the defense appealed the runner on first's failure to retouch 1B after the run scored. That out would not be not a force play, it is an appeal ... a "time play". If that out happened before the run scored, then the run would not count. If that out happened after the run scored, then the run would count...game over.
  3. As described, no. This is probably just an E8. But one would have to be there to really judge. In other words, I may see and describe the same play where interference would be the correct call. Often people come on here and describe a situation in a manner that elicits an interpretation that they desire.
  4. ricka56

    Is the play dead?

    Depends on what the league is about. Its a rec-league. No one should get their panties in a twist over an incorrect call...crack open another beer and have fun. Umpires are needed to keep players from cheating in games that matter. If the outcome of the game (and plays) doesn't matter, why incur the expense.
  5. ricka56

    Pitcher Covering Home on Wild Pitch

    I'll take your word that the pitcher set up 1-2 seconds before that ball arrived. But that isn't the significant time frame that we need to know about. Before the runner gets in the vicinity of HP, the pitcher can be anywhere he wants. The time at which the runner had to choose his final path to HP, is the pertinent moment used to judge obstruction. If the runner had to altered his path because of the pitcher without the ball, then obstruction is the call. If the runner had to altered his path because of the pitcher with the ball, then there is no obstruction. This is always a tough call for an umpire to make. The offense and the defense will almost always see it oppositely. If there is obstruction, that benefit of doubt about the attempt to avoid contact may go to the runner. No obstruction, that benefit of the doubt most likely goes to the fielder. Even when the umpire understands how to properly officiate such a play, this is often a call that could go either way. A pure judgement call. And many umpire err on the side of caution and rule interference on the runner, in part to nip in the bud any thought of retaliation by the defense. Not that that's the right thing to do, but sometimes that's in the back of an umpire's head.
  6. ricka56

    Pitcher Covering Home on Wild Pitch

    Judging intent is not easy. All you usually only get are subtle pieces of evidence happening instantaneously, one way and the other. The umpire has to judge whether there was sufficient evidence that the runner attempted to avoid the contact to absolve him of the penalty. 99% hazardous and 1% attempt to avoid is too low an effort for me to even notice, let alone absolve a runner. And I've had the fielder 99% hazardous, where I ruled in the runner's favor. And you ignored the key phrase in the point that I was making. If there is a doubt about whether the runner complied with the slide/attempt to avoid rule, and the runner choose not to slide (when sliding would have had eliminated the need for judgement), then the runner is most likely not getting the benefit of that doubt.
  7. ricka56

    Pitcher Covering Home on Wild Pitch

    Still, the collision was entirely avoidable if he slid. When a runner slides, he has done the most he can do to avoid contact. If he chooses not to slide, then the runner does not get the benefit of the doubt as to whether his attempt to avoid contact was sufficient (even if he is the smaller of the two colliding).
  8. ricka56

    Third out

    Contrary to popular belief, the runner getting doubled off at 2B is not a force play. Force plays can only occur when a batter/runner forces runners to move up (refer to force play definition). Once the batter is out, no force play can occur. As stated above, your play was a time play. The runner from 3B scored before the runner from 2B was out, so the run counts.
  9. ricka56

    'REAL' job

    Chief branding manager for Dick's Sporting.
  10. ricka56

    interference/obstruction/play on???

    And rule interference ? That could be supported by the rules maybe, but only the delight DHC would buy that judgement call.
  11. ricka56

    3 feet, continuing to advance,

    Glad to see this clarification put into the rules/interp. Before that, umpires had a catch-22. If a runner stayed more than 3 feet away from the ball carrier (more than an arm's length away), then a tag attempt couldn't be made. If no tag attempt, then the rule didn't apply. And if the runner was within 3 feet (less than arm's reach), a tag could be made and you didn't need the rule. That made no sense. Runners getting themselves in a rundown are 99% out if the fielders don't screw it up. And you have to be Houdini to be in the other 1%.
  12. ricka56

    Fulmer calls out PU

    Am I the only one who's noticed that this exchange rate has inverted, rendering this expression obsolete... ... and betting donuts to dollars just doesn't have the same ring to it. Levity is the only contribution I can make to this thread.
  13. ricka56

    Horrible news - @grayhawk

    I just read this thread about Steve's accident. Horrible news. Thought and prayers to Grayhawk, one of the best contributors to this site, and judging by my convos with him, a fine man. Speedy recovery, bruda.
  14. ricka56

    Double Set - Balk

    Pick one...be an umpire...make the call or no call. Have your explanation ready before asked. Understand that those there will probably second-guess you, no matter your choice...goes with the territory.
  15. ricka56

    Mound Visits

    My understand is the same as yours...true.
×