Jump to content

johnnyg08

Moderators
  • Posts

    7,725
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    62

Everything posted by johnnyg08

  1. Except it's not a cop out. It's the truth. There are all kinds of situations in the game where they offense & defense are simply responsible for knowing the situation. R1, and a check swing, ball 4, on appeal R1 is tagged as he's jogging to 2b on ball four...defense appeals the check/half swing and it's ruled a strike. R1 is out. Offense is responsible for knowing the situation. It's definitely not a cop out...I also don't think this situation was handled very well by U2...they're not mutually exclusive.
  2. I hear you...there are games that I work where it's really windy and there's no chance anybody's going to hear me and I'm certainly not going to scream it....I do that and it's likely everybody just stops...b/c why is the umpire screaming? Both the defense & the offense is responsible for knowing the situation...especially at the MLB level
  3. Letting play continue is a mess. One of the "big dogs" or a power five team will have to mess it up in order to necessitate a change. Even when we're right, our recommendations tend to fall on deaf ears. Nice work everyone. I guess if I were giving advice to new umpires...I would recommend that they kill it and place runners...but if I'm being honest, I'd just hope that somebody on the field would see it and call it....and ideally, enforce it properly. Nobody on the field would disagree with killing it and placing runners. After all, obstruction is a defensive penalty....why give the defense the opportunity for even more outs? We kill runner interference immediately..even in times where the defense could've made the play or maybe even turned a double play...in my mind killing it at the time of the "out" call makes sense and is consistent with other types of mechanics/enforcements.
  4. Appreciate it. I think some folks get lazy and just say or think "Go to ccs...for the answer" There's certainly a place for that...but there's also value in discussing things on here...we have some knowledgable folks among us and sometimes I think CCS (While very good) does not allow for a ton of back and forth on gray area stuff.
  5. That's my thing...at that point in the game it seems to me that Cora would've argued a bit harder for the possibility of a consult. That's the most surprising piece...it's possible that maybe a base guy sees F2 reaching for the baseball?
  6. Yep...and it was a foul tip until it wasn't. Not sure where you're going with this?
  7. They sure do...I'd like to discuss it here to see what people have to say in this forum.
  8. I'm aware of the rule & its associated terminology. My question was...is this a miss by the crew?
  9. It's better to get in the habit of verbalizing all of them.
  10. Is this simply a miss by the crew and a passive response from Cora? Or is there an intricacy somewhere in the rules that I'm missing about securing the foul tip?
  11. In this hypothetical, let's assume that after the correct call of Runner Lane Interference there are less than three outs. Do we return the runners to their Time of Pitch, Time of Throw, or Time of Interference bases? Does rule set matter? OBR, NFHS, NCAA
  12. He does and there is literally zero discussion there.
  13. I'll lock the CCS post and link this thread in that post since this one was here first.
  14. at 3:56 in this video, there's the split screen shot as well as the Cliff Notes version of the analysis 🙂
  15. Here's a very long clip of the play w/ both home & away feeds. The AZ announcers seem to have no idea what's happening...the Houston crew does a much better job of recognizing what's happening.
  16. I think it's an offense initiated play after continuous action had ceased to negate Arizona's intent to appeal that R3 left early to wipe the run.
  17. Perhaps...but clutching the pearls on the "I'm not required to ask" in NFHS is something some need to move beyond. Nothing productive comes out of that...have a good pregame with your partner and if they want us to check...check. If they're being morons about it...we have tools at our disposal to snuff that out as well.
  18. Right...and minus a verbal/mechanic indicating a strike (blah, blah, blah) we don't need another mechanic. The reality is that too many mechanics confuse coaches, players & fans...and if it confuses them, then we should think strongly about not doing that mechanic.
  19. Yuck. I haven't been to a clinic in a while. Seems like overkill to me. Me not using a strike verbal/mechanic should be clue enough that I have a ball. Sometimes we need to stay out of our own way.
  20. You're right. I'm working out of OBR for this thread. You're also right that NFHS is the rule set that give the PU some discretion by rule. If a coach is being that big of an ass to my partner...I'm going to ask him to knock it off one time. If I judge his behavior to be ass-worthy again...I'm simply going to eject him.
×
×
  • Create New...