Replacematt

12 minutes ago, Velho said:

When is it in not academic?

Honestly, it's so academic that I can't remember off the top of my head due to its rarity. I want to say there are two cases in which it would make a difference, and I can't recall them. 

44 minutes ago, Coachhimup said:

So is the issue is the wording ?

Also 1st base is NOT a force play?

Another question/scenario:

Bases loaded 1 out. BR hits line drive to left field. R3 scores, R 2 scores, r1 misses 2nd Base ends up on 3rd, BR ends up on 2nd. Defense successfully appeals. Do the runs count?

I've been studying so much seems like it's running together on me.

Thanks for the discussion I really appreciate it

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk
 

1st base is not a force play. This is academic in most cases.

And yes, the runs count in your play as there would only be two outs at the end of it. How can I word this without being confusing...if the there is (are) appeal(s) on a play that is (are) not the third out, it means nothing for runners that have scored unless the appeal is on a runner that scored, in which case only their run gets erased. If the play results in a third out, then there is the possibility that runs can be erased on other runners.

The rulebooks are necessary, but I feel that they are not the best way to learn the rules. For OBR, I'd suggest this: https://www.ump-attire.com/Products/PBUC-UMPMAN/Minor-League-Baseball-Umpire-Manual-Rulebook and/or the Wendlestedt Rules and Interpretations Manual (you'll have to contact them directly.) Note that this is not binding on HS baseball or leagues that use FED rules.

I don't do youth baseball, but I know several sanctioning bodies have their own interpretation manuals (Little League, for one.)

1 hour ago, Jimurray said:

By adding the first base exclusion they are implying that some people who read “force play at any base” consider it a force play at 1B. That exclusion was not there in years past and I don’t think most of us would think a force play at any base would include 1B. Why add that exclusion?

Because, as you said, some people consider it a force play (mistakenly.) This accounts for their error.

22 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

Well, though it's probably for OBR/pro, Jim Evans, as far as I know, offers the same opinion and he IS a highly respected official.  

You've mentioned this, but this doesn't ring a bell to me (nor does it seem to make sense.) Here's an example why:

R3. We have CI on the swing and the pitch goes to the backstop, scoring R3. It makes no sense to me why the offense would be (in effect) penalized for the defense's infraction by being forced to take the penalty and lose that run. I'm imagining this situation being the winning run and trying to explain why I wiped it out because the defense broke a rule.

Do you have any way to find that from Evans? Wendlestedt's RIM doesn't address it directly.

9 hours ago, Jimurray said:

It's not a force by rule but nobody should have a conniption if it's called a force for the purpose of not scoring a run. But as NCAA has discovered some one has called it a force for application of their force play slide rule and, going the least resistance route, NCAA does not say the play at 1B is not a force, they say the force play slide rule does not apply there.

I don't read that clause that way. To me, it implies that it's acknowledging that FPSR does not apply at first base precisely because it's not a force. I see nothing there that says there's a force at first.

1 hour ago, agdz59 said:

Jesus christ, lighten up. I saw something in the rule book I hadn't thought through the implications of. I mention it here. You guys think I'm looking for it instead of the game in front of me. Where in the hell did you get that from what I posted?

Then I try to make what is obviously a joke and you think I'm not thinking it through? WTF?

I try with this place but y'all have bugs way upside your buttholes.  Give it a rest.

It wasn't obviously a joke. Keeping that in mind, what Max was saying was helpful in thinking through how to officiate that.

5 hours ago, SH0102 said:

Since you are taking the NCAA test, I’ll speak to that.  That question is a trip bc it is verbatim from the rule book but only applies when no runners are on.  Runners on, dropped ball is a balk whether it goes 3” or 3 miles

Correct. This is straight out of the book, and has been on the test two years in a row.

5 minutes ago, kylehutson said:

If you're turning your head to the side, that would be a problem. I don't do that. I still keep my eye on the ball, but I do slide my feet so I'm out of the direct path.

If you're moving either way, you're increasing the angle to the bat, even if you don't turn your head. It's a bigger issue if you're sliding to the outside than the inside, but both increase the risk.

5 hours ago, MadMax said:

I caught for 16 years, and I’ve been an umpire for 14 years, doing some 150-160 plates per year… I think I can tell when a pitch is going to be a 58-59-footer and gonna skip in an’ keeeeelll me. Granted, a lot of this is contextual – a 19 year old collegiate F2, or a 23 year old Minor League AA F2 is gonna be a helluva lot more reliable at blocking that spike job than a 15 year old, snot-nosed, PS5-playin’ catcher kid-wearing-some-gear.

So yes, on a 16U game, I have been known to… er… slide or shuffle… or sidestep once I know this is going to be a ball. 

As maven has reminded us here at U-E many times – a pitch that bounces short of the plate cannot be a called strike. So why am I locked in, tracking it alllllll the way to the mitt???!!

Self-preservation, man. It means something. 

Ok, but I'd also be worried about that 15-year-old batter kid-holding-a-bat-with-no-discipline taking that pitch off the bounce and fouling it back into the side of my skull with the new and improved angle.

16 minutes ago, Guest concertman71 said:

I have been reading about this (and drinking bourbon!) most of the night). If I understand this correctly, (FED) 8.2.1 allows for the BR to be considered to have legally acquired 1b when he passed it. However, 8.2.3 would make it seem that if there was R3 who scored, BR would be out when he missed 1B regardless of appeal. 

Additionally, reading the FED rule book and casebook, as well as the BRD 2016, I can not find the rule or the wording that says (other than HOPKINS) that the runner is safe. Mostly wondering how I can explain a "safe" then "OUT" (on appeal) when BR missed 1b but beat the throw. 

I am wondering if this is one of those rules where we all see the BR beat the throw, but miss the base, so we bang him out, and then there is no explanation needed. Is this one of those obscure rules interps where we (as umpires) like to show the coaches that we know the rules better than they do, or should we just bang the out, and if there is a question, tell the offensive coach that his BR missed the base and move on?

It's really not an interpretation. In all codes, by rule, a runner is considered to have reached the base once they have completely passed it. Thus, they can not be put out for not reaching the base before the base is tagged (relevant on a force play or at first base.) The runner is safe until there is an appeal. The relevant rules are FED 3-4-2i and j, and 8-2-3.

It's our job to know the rules and enforce them properly. I'd better know the rules better than a coach unless they've been as diligent in understanding the rules as an umpire would.

1 hour ago, Richvee said:

Or those Cannabis gummies kicked in.  

I highly doubt those would contribute to this type of behavior.

One of the major things is equity. Not every facility would have the ability to have replay (I'd say almost all HS-level and below would find the cost either prohibitive or not worth it.) So, if it was allowed and only available at a few places, there's the issue of having a de facto different set of rules at those places that have replay compared to those that don't.

Also, replay rules get complicated in a hurry--what can be reviewed and when, how challenges work, who is authorized to challenge, etc. I'd say many (if not most) youth coaches would not find the effort worthwhile to learn those guidelines and most youth umpires would not enforce them consistently. 

For the games that I do that have review, I keep a small copy of Section VIII in my lineup card holder: https://unitedumpires.org/pdf/NCAA-Baseball-Video-Review-Regulations.pdf

12 hours ago, MadMax said:

If I may interject, it's absolutely imperative that a PU "actively processes" this situation instead of reflexively reacts. Both of the above perspectives have merit. 

The trouble is, amateur umpires either get delinquent or lazy in situations like this; the lazy ones get yelled at, demerited, chastised, or (worse) chalked-up / written-off as lazy. The delinquent ones (good intentions, slow in recognition, reaction, and movement) unfortunately compensate either by over-communicating (again, good intentions) or by... "over-reacting" to the point of heading off to 3B as soon as the ball leaves the bat! 

You just can't. Say it's a sawn-off drubber at the plate, or a bunt. Not only does PU have Fair/Foul responsibility, but he's the only guy in the entire ballpark that can (properly) judge RLI. If he starts bounding down towards 3B, you can fuhgetaboutit on selling yes/no on potential RLI. Similar can be said about a bounding ball towards F3 and 1B. PU must stay on the line to judge Fair/Foul, and if there's a potential swipe tag coming, or pulled/missed foot by a F1 covering... 

Point is, that move to 3B may be advised, but it's not automatic.

That's why the mechanic says to wait until there's no RLI or F/F...

1 hour ago, noumpere said:

And I had multiple plays where as BU I was hung out on a swipe tag at first and PU could have helped.

 

It's as I've said -- the mechanics on this go back-and-forth because whoever is in charge at some particular time has had one play or the other.

I don't think PU is in a significantly worse position on a swipe tag on this being in the area the mechanics say to go. If the ball is going to first, PU should be off the front edge of the mound. 

To me it's all about the leverage I mentioned--R3 or an out is a bigger call than R1 or an out.

14 minutes ago, noumpere said:

I should add that my answer above is what we did in my state (which never used pure FED mechanics), in my college group (I forget whether that was the standard at the time), and in all our OBR games.

 

I still think it's better than having PU go to third on this play -- but nobody asked me.

I used to think the same, until we had a breakdown similar to what the OP was asking on a DP attempt. I as PU was able to get a read step and see the tag by F6 on R1 after a throw from across the diamond, whereas BU was hung out to dry if they had taken it (calls at 2B, 1B, and 3B? Not ideal.)

In the end, BU taking an overthrow isn't that much different than PU, and that play at third (when it happens) is a high-leverage situation.

2 hours ago, Umpire942 said:

 

Kevin_k and Matt are basically saying opposite answers. 

@Kevin_K i think is saying after the cleanup i just go to plate

 

@Matt you are saying yes i do have to cover third, unless there is a play action all at first. and no dp? or even still ?

 

PU's first move, if there's no potential RLI or F/F, is to move to the 3B side of the mound. PU's primary responsibility is R1's slide; secondary is anything that happens at 1B.

If R1 is safe at 2B, PU's primary now becomes anything at 3B and home.

At this time, all mechanics (unless FED has changed) have PU taking 3B regardless of if the ball leaves the infield unless there is a play on the 1B line that is theirs (RLI, F/F.) BU takes an overthrow absent that.

15 minutes ago, aaluck said:

Hey guys- does this rule apply to a force out at home?

I think I know what you're asking, but could you clarify? Are you asking if the situation in the comment holds regarding the runner needing to be tagged?

20 hours ago, JonnyCat said:

Just don't know why anyone would get heartburn over numbers. I don't see the rational, but I don't make the rules.

No one has them (unless they move here from another area,) and there's no need to have them. (Also, with the reputation of the one adjoining association that does use numbers, an umpire in ours wearing it would be subconsciously presumed to be of lesser quality--their reputation is that bad.)

With 130ish umpires in my HS/D3 association and well more than that in the D3/D2/D1 association, someone is bound to just decide to have them added (the law of percentages...) This prevents that from happening and losing the uniformity.

Is a new umpire from a different area going to get in trouble if they have numbers on from their old group? Not in the "lower" association, which has a collaborative relationship with the "upper" association for mutual assigning (the upper association handles mainly D1 and shares D2 responsibilities with the lower associations while having it in its name. D3 is assigned by the lower associations with availabilities from any umpire that is in any association under the upper umbrella.) The upper association won't be assigning umpires (unless out of pro ball) to any of its games directly until they've got experience in their lower associations (which, being unnumbered, makes it a moot point by the time they do.)

18 minutes ago, JonnyCat said:

Numbers are very common on shirts and jackets. I've never heard of not being able to wear numbers at any level. No association in my area prohibits numbers. Like noumpere said, I don't think anyone would care.

Why would you think you cannot work games if you have numbers on your uniforms?

They are forbidden in both of my associations, which cover levels from HS to D1 between the two of them. So, if you want to work up in this state (and D2 or higher for this region of the country,) no numbers allowed.

4 hours ago, HokieUmp said:

Maybe I'm just lucky, but there have been a number of times where a pitcher TRIED to throw a pitch when I wasn't ready, or fully in my spot, or trying to get my mask back on - but none have ever gotten to the point where they THREW it.  Why?  Because I simply STOP THEM from doing it.

I know that sounds dickish, they way I'm writing that.  It's what it is, since it seems fairly obvious.  But what I mean is, most of us that umpire have this thing called a voice, and usually, one or more arms.  So if I see the young man (and let's be honest - it's generally the younger and/or less experienced players that do this) starting to make his motions behind the plate, I'm putting my hands up and hollering something to get him to stop.  I guess "No pitch!" is the favoured way, but I've been known to just say "Hang on!" or "Dude!" in that sitch.

I'd love to know how it got to such a point where not only did ANY of the pitcher/catcher/batter combo not realize the ump wasn't there to begin with, but the pitcher went all the way through his set or windup AND delivery and didn't screech to a halt on his own.

(But to specifically answer the question:  nothing would happen that would count in the game.  Pitcher might throw it, batter might hit it, but it means nothing.)

I would like to know that, too. 

However...

...if it happens, I don't agree (nor necessarily disagree) that it means nothing.

10 minutes ago, Thunderheads said:

And the home plate umpire IS NOT behind the plate?  Logic will tell me "no", the ball couldn't have been in play, but ...nowadays, ...who the hell knows!  

Why not? Rotation after a base hit, one umpire, there's plenty of times the ball is still in play without an umpire in the vicinity of home plate. I've worked many games were the ball was only put out of play by foul balls and/or hit batters, and I definitely was not planting roots at the plate.

Isn't that making a huge assumption the ball wasn't in play to begin with? 

Oh, and for the record, the patent is 6,497,7738.

The patent says it's for aluminum.