Jump to content

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member


Established Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Tborze

  1. Tborze


    Ah! But they threw in the "intentional" part. I don't see a conflict here. IMO
  2. Tborze


  3. Tborze


    Definitely not OBSTRUCTION!
  4. Tborze

    Interference on Batter?

    Note 233 should include "squeeze play" unless it is implied with "steal of home". Could still be specified IMO.
  5. Tborze

    Interference on Batter?

    Thank You for clarifying! All rule sets seem to emphasize "after the pitch", not subsequent plays after the pitch. I agree that the batter has his right to remain in the box on the initial play, because any other movement can result in INT. I'm not sure I would want to stand there, if I had time to vacate, as my teammate is barreling down third. OBR seems to be different, from what you quoted, in that the "vacate if there is time" element isn't mentioned. But again, the play presented in the OBR interp was an immediate play following the pitch. Is the thought that because the plays were made following the pitch, the batter still has a right to be in the box? For the OP, I agree with INT. OR willful indifference
  6. Tborze

    Interference on Batter?

    What am I missing? In the OP it was two errant throws, not a passed ball or wild pitch.
  7. Tborze

    Catch or No Catch - Frazier Pulls a Fast One

    How did the Dodger fans not see it and rat him out?
  8. Tborze

    Is the player out

    Hijack complete
  9. Tborze

    Yet another Balk question

    Yes. Explain lead foot not touching the ground.
  10. I’ll take option 3 for $500, Johnny.
  11. Tborze

    getting help on a check swing.

    I thought about this the other day and thought about using it in my pre game, which I do on a D3k as noumpere mentioned, which seems to be an advanced mechanic for some. If it's an inevitable/obvious appeal by the catcher and you are in agreement with PU, then signal. If different, wait for the ask! JMO
  12. Tborze

    LLWS Discussion / Umpires / Plays / Etc ...

    I was told LL mechanics was that BU's don't go out, no matter how many. True? @Rich Ives?
  13. Tborze

    LLWS Discussion / Umpires / Plays / Etc ...

    Check out the thread, "mask porn", under umpire equipment I think. The throat guard shouldn't be "dangling".
  14. Tborze

    Pick off attempt

    I saw it as though he did a 180', well, would be more like a 145', because he said "continued to spin".
  15. Tborze

    LLWS Discussion / Umpires / Plays / Etc ...

    I was gonna post the same sentiments earlier! OMG, I'm not turning into Mr. Ives The reason I didn't post was, they do get 3 strikes! But I've seen batters get rung up on unhittable pitches, 2' outside. (OK, 12-14") I agree you can expand it up and down, but be consistent! What I've seen so far was NOBODY knows the strike zones! Catchers are framing EVERY pitch! The way I feel is, if you can't hit the zone, maybe you shouldn't be pitching. This IS the WS! PS; Catchers don't seem to be helping matters!
  16. Tborze

    Interference, Obstruction, or Nothing?

    I'm with you here! When I first saw it I thought OBS. Maven makes a good point of hindrance before the ball arrives, but the angle we have in the video isn't the best view for that. Maybe U2's angle was better which is why there was no INT call. Well, there was a safe call, which I assume he had nothing on the play. IMO the full speed video is the best evidence, at least from this angle. As the ball is arriving, R1 sees F4 coming in and takes a step to his left, after the ball gets by, F4's momentum carries him into R1, which tells me R1 wasn't in front of him at the time he was making a play on the ball. If F4 would have fielded it, there would be no discussion. If there was replay, I don't think either call would have been reversed. Im more curious as to what U2 said to the coach. That was a quick discussion. And how bout the announcer? The runner has his right to the base!
  17. Tborze

    U1 in 3 Man

    I like this! Would you have to trail the runner somewhat to get an angle on this without interfering with the BR?
  18. Tborze


    Good JUDGEMENT! IOW, don't call a balk if there is ANY doubt. FED I believe uses the words, "drive a runner back".
  19. Tborze

    Is Interference The Correct Call?

    Continuing to run the bases in and of itself is not INT. Unless intentional, I have 2 outs with R3 and R1/R2. I also have someone who needs to pay more attention and/or work on their mechanics.
  20. Tborze


    MR20 Inactive 0 1 post Report post Posted 57 minutes ago Hi all, the end result of this play was called Interference. Is that the correct call? With the bases loaded and one out, the batter hit a grounder to 3B. The runner from 3B scored. The third basemen fielded the ball and tug 3B for the force out on the runner from 2B (for the 2nd out) and threw the ball to 1B hoping for a double play. However, the throw to 1B was errant and the batter was safe. The runner from 1B went all the way to 3B during this time. Here is where it gets crazy. The runner who was forced out at 3B thought he was safe and ran towards home on the errant throw. The defensive team threw home and the runner was called out (again) for the final out of the inning. The defense left the field. The offensive team realized what happened and argued that the runner couldn't be called out twice. Their stance was that the play should be ruled dead and the batter, who had gone to 2B when the defense threw home, should be returned to 1B and there should still be 2 outs. After a long discussion, the umpires ruled that the runner wasn't out because he was tagged out at home (the second time he'd been called out) but he was out because of interference. That was the final out and end of the inning. Was that the correct call? I had never seen anything like it before. Thank you, Mike ^ This was posted by @MR20 and was closed and sent here. Don't know why, not the same situation, but anyway. Continuing to to run the bases is not in and of itself INT. Unless intentional, I would have 2 outs with R3, and R1/R2. Wish there was a video on this!
  21. Tborze

    U1 in 3 Man

    Depending on the situation, PU can help with INT/OBS and the throw back into 1B, right? PU can also cover his partners "assets" if U3 goes out and U1 curls outside and high-tail it to cover 2B. Free all night for that one!
  22. Tborze

    OBS at Home Plate then Malicious Contact

    Look dude, stop jumping on the bandwagon! I, along with others, obviously saw it differently than you. If you can read, nowhere did I say I wouldn't call MC because it was a title run as you so conveniently mentioned 3TIMES!! Are you questioning my judgement? So if you aren't sure, call it anyway because it's not called enough? I'm sticking with my first judgement of seeing the play IN REAL TIME without the benefit of replay and I have no problem with the call on the field!! If you feel it was MC, I have no problem with that! I wouldn't question your JUDGEMENT! I've had one MC call @ the plate in 26 yrs, and I knew it when I saw it. Are we now comparing baseball to football? I agree with it. Hell, I keep my lid on at times for protection. And obviously by keeping it on, helps to determine if there was MC or not by how far it flies off your head <ANOTHER Maybe I'm in the minority, but I don't have problems in my games! Im done with this topic! @maven give me a call. I would love to take a drive over and call a game with you! This way you will stop picking on me I love the emojis keeps me laughing so I don't get to a point where I want to
  23. Tborze

    OBS at Home Plate then Malicious Contact

    I'm not one to throw out MC's like candy at a parade. If I'm not 100% sure, I'm not dumpin a kid to lose out on 2 games, especially during a Title run. We are also not afforded the luxury of instant replays and stills, and my initial judgement on the play was from U1's perspective. I can see MC being called here. I was just being honest as to how I saw it live, which seems I wasn't the only one. I'm sure my positioning would have been a lil better though! After a collision like that, I would have gone to my partners to get their views and opinions.