Jump to content

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member

Senor Azul

Established Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Senor Azul last won the day on November 12 2018

Senor Azul had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

236 Good

About Senor Azul

  • Birthday 07/16/1947

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    San Francisco Bay Area

More information about you

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

Recent Profile Visitors

4,616 profile views
  1. Senor Azul

    NFHS Catcher Blocking Plate

    2018 NFHS Case Book Play 2.22.1 Situation C: A runner is advancing to score when F7 throws home. F2 completely blocks home plate with his lower leg/knee while (a) in possession of the ball or (b) while juggling and attempting to secure the ball or (c) before the ball has reached F2. RULING: Legal in (a); obstruction in (b) and (c) if the catcher denied access to home plate prior to possessing the ball. 2018 NFHS Case Book Play 8.3.2 Situation C: F2 is in the path between third base and home plate while waiting to receive a thrown ball. R3 advances from third and runs into the catcher, after which R3 is tagged out. RULING: Obstruction. F2 cannot be in the base path without the ball in his possession, nor can he be in the base path waiting for a ball to arrive without giving the runner some access to home plate.
  2. Senor Azul

    Can an infielder deliberately drop a line drive?

    Mr. stkjock, in a game played between the Tigers and Astros on April 17, 2016, Tigers second baseman Ian Kinsler did exactly what you suggested. He had the game awareness to realize that the runner on first base was a much better base runner than the batter-runner. So he allowed a pop fly to drop untouched and then forced out the faster runner at second base. And as it turned out the next batter singled with the slower runner from first stopping at second base. A very smart move by Kinsler wound up saving a run. Here’s a link to video-- https://www.mlb.com/cut4/ian-kinsler-fakes-out-colby-rasmus/c-172899766
  3. Senor Azul

    Can an infielder deliberately drop a line drive?

    No, it is not legal. All codes (OBR, NCAA, and FED) agree that in any force situation the infielder cannot drop a fly ball or line drive intentionally. Here are the applicable pro rule and high school rule-- 2018 OBR rule 5.09 Making an Out (a) Retiring the Batter A batter is out when: (12) An infielder intentionally drops a fair fly ball or line drive, with first, first and second, first and third, or first, second and third base occupied before two are out. The ball is dead and runner or runners shall return to their original base or bases; APPROVED RULING: In this situation, the batter is not out if the infielder permits the ball to drop untouched to the ground, except when the Infield Fly rule applies. 2018 NFHS rule 8 SECTION 4 RUNNER IS OUT ART. 1 . . . The batter-runner is out when: c. his fair fly, fair line drive or fair bunt in flight is intentionally dropped by an infielder with at least first base occupied and before there are two outs. The ball is dead and the runner or runners shall return to their respective base(s). 1. In this situation, the batter is not out if the infielder permits the fair fly, fair line drive or fair bunt in flight to drop untouched to the ground, except when the infield fly rule (2-19) applies (5-1-1j).
  4. Senor Azul


    2018 NFHS rule 6 SECTION 2 INFRACTIONS BY PITCHER ART. 2 . . . Delay of the game includes: a. throwing to any player other than the catcher, when the batter is in the batter’s box, unless it is an attempt to retire a runner; PENALTY: The pitcher shall be ejected from the game after a warning. NCAA: If the pitcher unnecessarily delays (9-3c), the umpire shall call a balk. OBR: Same as NCAA. (6.02a-8) 2018 OBR rule 6.02 Pitcher Illegal Action (a) Balks If there is a runner, or runners, it is a balk when: (8) The pitcher unnecessarily delays the game; Rule 6.02(a)(8) Comment: Rule 6.02(a)(8) shall not apply when a warning is given pursuant to Rule 6.02(c)(8) (which prohibits intentional delay of a game by throwing to fielders not in an attempt to put a runner out). If a pitcher is ejected pursuant to Rule 6.02(c)(8) for continuing to delay the game, the penalty in Rule 6.02(a)(8) shall also apply. Rule 5.07(c) (which sets a time limit for a pitcher to deliver the ball when the bases are unoccupied) applies only when there are no runners on base. 6.02(c)(8) The pitcher shall not: (8) Intentionally delay the game by throwing the ball to players other than the catcher, when the batter is in position, except in an attempt to retire a runner. PENALTY: If, after warning by the umpire, such delaying action is repeated, the pitcher shall be removed from the game.
  5. Senor Azul

    Coach interference?

    There is surprisingly little written about base coach interference. I did find an analysis by Gil Imber of Close Call Sports titled Defining Base Coach Interference—It Had to be St Louis-- https://www.closecallsports.com/2016/05/defining-base-coach-interference-it-had.html For OBR rulings the takeaway from his article is this—“If the interference is intentional, it is to be called. If unintentional AND the coach did all he could to avoid it, it is not a violation.” As I stated before, I cannot find anything other than the applicable rule in FED (3-2-3). After a long search it dawned on me that the BRD did not have an entry that shows (and according to Mr. maven I have mad skills using the BRD) that FED differs from the OBR rule and case play given at the end of OBR rule 6.01(d) Comment. Does that mean that FED agrees with the OBR interpretation of base coach interference? No, not necessarily, but it has me thinking that it does even though there is nothing else to support that. I realize that it is not dispositive. I now think that FED looks at this question the same way as OBR.
  6. Senor Azul

    Coach interference?

    Mr. jjskitours, the reason I revived this thread is that I thought it needed more discussion. The OP did not specify which rule set was used in his game and so most of the replies were about OBR. In fact, a ruling for FED was not mentioned until Mr. maven’s second response dated May 29. And now you are asking about FED ruling. I think FED differs from OBR/NCAA but I cannot find any case plays similar to the OP or interpretations. That’s because OBR/NCAA requires coaches to be on the field and the rule (3-2-1) in FED is a coach MAY be stationed in each box. Mr. maven may very well be right that the rule 3-2-3 is definitive and under FED the coach’s interference would cause an out to be called. But it is different in OBR—here’s what the Jaksa/Roder manual says about coach’s interference-- From the 2017 Jaksa/Roder manual concerning interference by a base coach (a person not only authorized to be on the field but required to be on the field by rule in OBR and NCAA): “It is interference if a base coach… Blatantly and avoidably hinders a fielder’s try to field a fair or catchable batted ball or thrown ball. A coach must try to avoid a fielder trying to field. If he tries to avoid, but contacts a fielder, it is not interference. In most cases, a coach who does not try to avoid contact with a fielder will have interfered.
  7. Senor Azul

    On deck batter

    “A coach wants to know if on deck batter can use a tee if he does so behind the dugout.” That is the question posed in the OP. I posted the applicable rules to answer the question on April 2. MadMax posted his response 4 days later. Now I would like to ask him (and the two members who liked his post) if they read my post and just chose to ignore the actual rules that cover this scenario. By rule (2018 NFHS rule 1-2-3), the on-deck batter has to use his team’s on-deck circle if he chooses to warm up. By rule (2018 NFHS rule 1-3-4), when he warms up he cannot use a batting tee—only bats and items designed to remain part of the bat. Additionally, isn’t there a legal aspect to this scenario? If we as umpires allowed players to take bats off the playing field to practice aren’t we liable if, for example, a spectator was hurt by that bat? One last question and this is for the original poster, Mr. jjskitours, what did you tell your coach after reading all the replies to your post?
  8. Senor Azul

    Verbal OBS (FED) - Was I right or being OOO?

    From the 2016 BRD (section 375, pp. 250-51): Verbal obstruction is treated the same as physical obstruction. PENALTY: The obstructed runner is awarded one base in advance of his position on base. (2-22-1; 2.22.1a) Official Interpretation: Hopkins: If a defensive player tries to confuse an opponent by yelling “Go!” to a runner tagging, the umpire declares verbal obstruction if the affected runner reacts to the opponent’s attempt to confuse. PENALTY: The affected runner is awarded one base. The umpire warns the player committing the act. (Website 2004 #12) SITUATION 12: With R3 on third, B2 hits a fly ball to the outfield. As the runner on third tags, the defensive coach (in the third-base dugout) yells, “Go, go, go,” to the runner tagging. R3, as a consequence, leaves the base before the catch and must return to tag the base. RULING: This is verbal obstruction. At the end of playing action, U1 will award R3 home due to the obstruction. U1 will also warn the coach that his actions are not in accordance with fair play. (2-22-1, 3-3-1g-4, 8-3-2) “Verbal obstruction must affect the play before the umpire may penalize it.” Official Interpretation: Hopkins: Any verbal decoy, such as “I’ve got it,” is obstruction. (Website 2001 #14) SITUATION 14: With runners on first and second and one out, the batter hits a ground ball to the shortstop. The second baseman calls "I got it" and acts as if it is a pop-up. The runners stay at their respective bases and a double play is made, second to first. RULING: This is verbal obstruction. Runners will be awarded third and second. There are two outs since the out on the batter-runner will stand. (2-22-1; 8-3-2) Play 239-375: R1, R3, 0 outs. F1 pauses in the set position. From the defensive first-base dugout, someone yells, “Back!” R1 reacts by diving toward first. As R1 scrambles for the bag, the pitcher throws wildly toward third with the ball ricocheting off the fence and heading for the bullpen, with F7 in hot pursuit. R3 scores. R1 gets up and tries for second but is thrown out. Ruling: In FED, R1 was verbally obstructed. He is awarded second. R3’s run counts: On the obstruction, the ball was delayed dead: 0 outs, one run in, runner on second. In NCAA/OBR, there is no verbal obstruction. The play stands: one out, one run in.
  9. Senor Azul

    Losing contact with the rubber during the windup?

    Here’s the rule that Mr. Jimurray alluded to and a bit of text from the Jaksa/Roder manual explaining the rule-- 2018 OBR 5.07(a)(1) The Windup Position The pitcher shall stand facing the batter, his pivot foot in contact with the pitcher’s plate and the other foot free. From this position any natural movement associated with his delivery of the ball to the batter commits him to the pitch without interruption or alteration. He shall not raise either foot from the ground, except that in his actual delivery of the ball to the batter, he may take one step backward and one step forward with his free foot... From the 2017 Jaksa/Roder manual (p. 137): (Windup Position) In the motion to pitch, the pitcher’s…pivot foot may make only one step to become better situated for the pitch (optional) and may not then be reset.
  10. Senor Azul

    Stoping motion with no runners on.

    From the 2013 Wendelstedt Rules and Interpretations Manual (section 6.1.3, p. 95): “After assuming either the Wind-Up or Set Position, any motion naturally and discernibly associated with his delivery commits him to deliver his pitch. If the pitcher stops his pitching motion in either position with no runners on base, there is no penalty. The pitcher and batter will start over from scratch.” Case Play P567 (p. 272 WRIM): No one on, one out, 1-2 count. The pitcher, from the Wind-Up Position, starts his motion, but stops halfway through. He then re-engages the rubber and begins to take signs again. Ruling: With no runners on base, there is no violation.
  11. Senor Azul

    Oldies but Goodies Part 1

    Here are official interpretations from the 2016 BRD (section 514, pp. 329-330) that answer whether the run would count or not-- FED: A runner who has scored on a force play but is guilty of interference with a fielder nullifies his run. (2.32.2C; 8.4.2w) Official Interpretation: Rumble: A runner who has scored but is guilty of interference with a batted ball keeps his run but causes a teammate to be out. OBR: Deary: The umpire will cancel a legally scored run if the runner who has scored is guilty of interference with a fair batted ball after crossing the plate. Barney Deary was a director of PBUC, in other words, supervisor of minor league umpires. I mention that because in the original thread this interpretation was sneered at as something less than credible. This interpretation was listed in the 2014 BRD as being from a letter by Mr. Deary to the editor of Referee magazine in 1987. The objection was that the interpretation was too old and it was misconstrued as being from Referee magazine not from the director of minor league umpires.
  12. Senor Azul


    I was going to stay out of this one but there is a possibility that we are being trolled. The question posed in the OP matches the actual rule (How a Team Scores)-- 2018 OBR rule 5.08 Comment APPROVED RULING: One out, Jones on third, Smith on first, and Brown flies out to right field. Two outs. Jones tags up and scores after the catch. Smith attempted to return to first but the right fielder’s throw beat him to the base. Three outs. But Jones scored before the throw to catch Smith reached first base, hence Jones’ run counts. It was not a force play.
  13. Senor Azul

    Obs, interference or no call

    Frankly, neither I nor my umpire associations ever had that problem so I do not share your concern. What I am concerned about, however, is whether or not you still believe that an umpire should consider where the runner’s feet are on a throw from anywhere else but from the plate area and invoke RLI. Actually, Carl Childress anticipated your objection, Mr. beerguy55. He stated the following in his 2016 BRD-- “Briefly: The catcher does not have to throw for the umpire to call BATTER interference. The play takes place quickly. The catcher is stationary. Remember, too, the runner had a lead. So, even subtle movements by the batter can easily sabotage the catcher’s response. On the other hand, to get an interference call the catcher must throw when the batter-runner is not in the running lane. The time constraint for the play is much more relaxed. The batter-runner, for example, doesn’t have a lead: He starts from scratch. Therefore, the catcher has time to find a good place from which to throw. He is not anchored to a spot. Recall from your games the catcher’s commands to the first baseman: ‘Inside!” or ‘Outside!’”
  14. Senor Azul

    Oldies but Goodies Part 1

    Let’s see how many interferences the runner in the OP committed— The runner who just scored is hit by a fair batted ball The runner who just scored prevents the fielder from making a play The runner who just scored prevents a batted ball from going foul (The status of the batted ball in this scenario had not been established yet. It was rolling back toward the plate and the defense could have chosen to let the ball roll foul but that choice was taken away by the offense.) The original thread currently can be found on page 37 of the Ask the Umpire forum. The consensus then—several members asserted—since the runner had scored his status has changed from runner to something else and these interference rules no longer applied to him. Do you agree? Would you ignore all those infractions?
  15. Senor Azul

    Oldies but Goodies Part 2

    Getting a running start on a pitch is spelled out in the NCAA rules as being illegal— 2017-18 NCAA rule 8 When Runners Are Out on Appeals SECTION 6. a. A runner shall be called out on specific appeals that occur as a result of a base running error when: 2) The runner starts from a position behind the base in order to get a running start, whether on a pitch or tagging up for a fly ball; or It is also illegal in FED. The following text is from the 2016 BRD: “A runner may not get a running start from behind the base either before or at TOP. PENALTY: The runner is called out immediately, and the ball remains alive. (8-4-2o)” 2018 NFHS rule 8-4 ART. 2 . . . Any runner is out when he: o. positions himself behind a base to get a running start; or