Jump to content

johnnyg08

Moderators
  • Content Count

    7,557
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    61

Everything posted by johnnyg08

  1. There definitely was a pattern there of using Teddy. We don't ask when we think we can get it on our own. He must have thought he could get it on his own. I do think it's a miss though.
  2. Finally, here's one that's closest to the play we saw tonight:
  3. Another Case Play
  4. Sample case play
  5. Fair enough...but then it begs the question that there are more disadvantages than advantages to that technique.
  6. 100% agree with you...he was self preservation on that...he only tried to field it that way b/c his footwork was so awful he was left with no other option. He goes right foot and he can probably catch the throw in flight, out in front. I'm okay with the no call....but I think the no-call folks are leaning too heavily on a throw that an MLB first baseman probably field 99 out of 100 times with a compliant runner. I might be the only one on the planet who thinks this...but this is a far more complicated call than what some are making it. A "quality throw" is not a throw that has to hit F3 in the sternum. It's a throw that could result in the batter/runner being retired without extraneous effort from F3. There's some judgment in what that is...but I think many umpires have too high of a standard for a "quality throw" when Wendelstedt even says that a "true throw" is not required especially when the batter/runner know exactly what he's doing. Harry's Hints from Wendlestedt: "Though a throw does not need to be "true," if there is no possible play on the runner because of where the ball was thrown, there cannot be interference for being outside the running lane. Just because a fielder must leave the bag to catch the throw does not remove the possibility of calling interference for running outside of the running lane"
  7. I really lean in your direction. There is one reason and one reason only why he's running there. I need to add...I HATE F3s footwork on this. He goes right foot and we're probably not talking about this today...or last night.
  8. Here's another clip with one more angle at the end of the clip. From a distance...maybe it tells a different story? Maybe not?
  9. Now I'm just having fun, but you get the point. I moved the batter-runner into compliant territory.
  10. Here are a couple of images with the runner and without the runner (assuming compliance) Couldn't we say that Voit has a legitimate chance to scoop this throw had the batter/runner been compliant? Is there less controversy here because there was no heated argument/ejection? Or is it as simple as this play was officiated properly and there should be some amendments to Wendelstedt's interpretation?
  11. Harry's Hints from Wendlestedt: "Though a throw does not need to be "true," if there is no possible play on the runner because of where the ball was thrown, there cannot be interference for being outside the running lane. Just because a fielder must leave the bag to catch the throw does not remove the possibility of calling interference for running outside of the running lane"
  12. It's convenient to argue the "quality throw" but let me ask this to the group...IF the batter/runner was compliant, would it have given F3 a chance to field the throw?
  13. FED rule is the same as it's always been...(well, maybe not ALWAYS)...but you get the point.
  14. Yep...under the old rule that would be true. In 2020 & going forward, we're going to have a foul tip by rule.
  15. This is the first thread in this forum about the rule change. I would have never looked in "Ask the Umpire" then inside of the "Tipped Ball" thread to see or notice that. Which is weird...I've had a lot of extra time in my mom's basement...I should have seen every post on the Internet regarding 2020 OBR rule changes considering the website still has the 2019 book published.
  16. I haven't double checked...but I didn't see that part of the rule changed..(so...not exactly the same as a catch for the other positions) From what I know right now...F2 would still need to secure possession of the baseball for it to be a foul tip vs a foul ball.
  17. Correct. Mask, chest protector, etc...they're treating it like any other batted ball in flight..and the requirements of a catch.
  18. It's not the same. The must hit the glove or hand first is no longer a requirement.
×
×
  • Create New...