JHSump

You may wish to interpret 4.09(b) that way, but that is not what 4.09(b) says. It does not say the umpire *can* declare the game over when those two things occur. The wording of 4.09(b) does not support your interpretation. It ambiguously means something else, as I have explained before.

You guys are misunderstanding the wording in 4.09(b). It gives the *necessary* but not *sufficient* conditions to end the game. It precisely, exactly, unambiguously states that the game cannot end until R3 crosses home and BR reaches first. It does not say those events are all that are necessary. The wording *means* those events are not sufficient. There is no doubt about this, given the structure of the wording of the rule. Perfect example of why the game cannot be over just because R3 crossed home and BR reached 1B, given by @Jimurray: If the batter had grounded to F5 who then stepped on 3B and threw to F4 for a force at 2B, you would not be arguing that R3 reaching home and the BR reaching first had ended the game!

The other criteria aren't mentioned right there below 4.09, but they are present in the rules, elsewhere. Certainly, if R1 and R2 are forced out at 2B and 3B, then the inning ends despite R3 reaching home and the BR reaching 1B, and the game is not over.

Actually, no. 4.09(b) does not support that conclusion. See my reply just above yours. R3 touching home and BR touching 1B are not all that's needed. Vanover's explanation looks incorrect to me.

In 4.09(b) "the runner forced to advance from third has touched home base and the batter-runner has touched first base" is a *necessary* condition on the game being ended. It is not a sufficient condition. In other words, the game is not over just because R3 touched home base and BR touched 1B. (For example, if there are two outs one could still force someone else at 2B, and the inning is ended, not the game.)

@BillKen Is there a video? I don't see anything but your text.

What "eponymous" means! At least that is one thing I learned!

And the ESPN strike zone looks misleading/incorrect.

Yankess, Red Sox, ESPN.

Wow! That is a vast improvement! But I don't think it's ready for prime time. I tried buying some poly wools and in the process of registering it decided I was someone else!! So, I am going to wait a bit...

I'm the 4th! Let's see how many we can rack up! I almost never grant time on dives back into bases or slides into bases. I only grant time if there is an obvious need for it. And I have never had any coach or fan complain. Maybe it's because I'm so handsome. Now that I think about it, nobody ever complains about anything I do while umpiring! Hahahaha yeah, right. But, I have never had a complain about not granting time on slides, etc. I do say things like, "You don't need it" and then the kid just stands up or walks it up. Maybe I don't look angry when I say it. As for the batter asking for time as he steps into the box, I don't generally grant that time either. And I don't call a balk or illegal pitch if the pitcher starts his windup before the batter is ready/looking at the pitcher. I do what @NorthTexasUmp does. I kill it if the pitcher starts before the batter is ready, and I tell him to wait until the batter ready. I only call a balk or quick pitch if the pitcher actually throws the pitch before the batter is ready. My thinking is other things can happen (as @jpperez14 says) and I don't want to be excessively calling Time and Play. But more importantly, I don't want the pitcher throwing a pitch before the batter is looking!! That is a real safety issue more important than letting the pitcher get himself called for a balk or quick pitch.

Very cool!

The old Yankee Stadium had monuments and a flag pole in play in CF. Check out the beginning of this video where Bobby Mercer has to navigate these items to retrieve a ball. (The rest of the video is not related.) I suppose there were not ground rules concerning balls bouncing around among these items.

On AH's head height, was he reacting to F2 sliding toward the batter as the pitch was delivered? In other words, did AH perhaps move in and down since he was squeezed a bit? What was his head height throughout the game? Or, is AH using the "super slot"? As I understand it, the super slot has the head lower. You set up like you are squeezed on every pitch. But I might be wrong about that. I've only heard the super slot described in words. You super slot-er's out there please chime in @Majordave @Mr Ump

Did the ball go into the dugout? I looks like it may have, in the video. And, the umpires signaled obstruction, then called time after signaling obstruction, probably because the ball entered the dugout. All of which would be appropriate for type b obstruction with the throw going out of play. (And I suppose it's type 2 obstruction in the new OBR numbering system.)

I would not set up directly behind the catcher, even if it gave me the best view. It is very common for fouls to fly right past my right ear (for RHBs) and left ear (for LHBs) when I am in the slot. All those fouls would be direct hits to my mask if I were set up directly behind the catcher. In addition, I suspect I get a better view from the slot of all the information that goes into deciding up and down (e.g., height of the ball and catcher's mitt relative to the batter and the catcher).

Will the San Rafael game be recorded and available for replay? I think it would be at least entertaining to watch. I imagine most ball/strike calls will be fine, but perhaps slower than normal. Then there will be the times when Byrnes will have to umpire. It would be interesting to see and hear his reaction to the realities of the situation. And, it would be interesting to see the reactions of players and coaches. When the system seems to be making a mistake, how would he judge the result? Guess? Flip a coin? Keep a running tally and give one call to one team, the next call to the other team? I thought was funny that one of the commentators suggested that Byrnes should be behind the plate during the game, not in the booth. That would certainly add more entertainment value.

We would be fooling ourselves to dismiss these sorts of discussions. Yes, there are aspects of umpiring, specifically calling balls and strikes, that players, coaches, and commentators do not fully understand. In the end, umpiring will involve some combination of human input and technological assistance. There will probably never be a time where human umpires are gone. There are too many unpredictable events that can occur and can't be fully judged by machines. As we like to say, sometimes you just have to umpire, and that involves human judgment. In many ways, the Pitch F/X system is not as close to perfect as these commentators think. And it probably won't take account of all the necessary factors involved in calling balls and strikes, no matter what the technological improvements. For example, consider that the upper and lower parts of the defined strike zone are ill defined, of course. Some human must decide on how to apply the system to those boundaries. In addition, as we all know, there are a whole host of other issues that come into play. Look at the replay system. Even with ultra-slow motion replays some human needs to make a decision, and a set of "new" issues have come into play (e.g., when, exactly, is the ball "caught" by F3?). Umpires need to be part of this discussion and help baseball by educating the other participants as to the subtleties involved. It may take umpires that have some understanding of the technology. There are some of us with a more than passing understanding of the sorts of technology that might be involved.

Check out the "super slot" thread(s) from a few months ago.

I know this is an old thread, but here's an update... I had a 9U tournament game this past weekend. You know my deal if you've read any of this thread: big strike zone, but not outlandish, I called armpits to knees, line to line. It started with the first batter. The pitchers were not throwing hard, so any pitch near the knees that did not hit the dirt was a strike. The coaches encouraged their batters to swing, and to protect the plate with 2 strikes. There were no complaints. When the game was over the final score was a low 4-1. One coach, in the middle of the game, asked me again for my first name...with a smile. The game took 1:10 for a full 6 innings. At the end of the game I had quite a few parents tell me they liked my umpiring. And --- not that this was my goal --- there was not a single walk in the game. One thing that has not been mentioned so far in this thread: pitchers relax when they realize the zone is not a postage stamp. They pitch better, and actually throw more strikes. Pitchers relax, batters become aggressive, fielders get to field, parents get to cheer. Umpires get to relax too.

What was the old stance (that you went back to)? What was the new stance you were experimenting with?

Maybe I have an odd-shaped head! Or maybe if I tried another HSM I might find it fits better. But after many attempts at adjusting the straps, and even the position of the removable chin pad, the best fit I could get had the chin pad pretty snug, mainly against the tip of my chin, with the only snug point of contact inside the main helmet being at the very top of my head. (I tried wearing a hat inside the HSM also, in which case the top padding was in pretty snug contact with the metal button at the top of the hat, resulting in pain there!). With only those two points of contact, if I shake my head back and forth the helmet rotates back and forth on my face. If I tap it with my hand, it wants to shake back and forth on my face. That does not seem right. I can only get bear minimal contact with the forehead pad. I've decided to send the helmet back. I have not worn it in a game. I'll stay with my TM (Diamond) with TWPs, worn loose. No pain in normal wear (of course). And the rig spins on my head when I get hit, minimal pain at most.

I bought a Force3 HSM and it arrived today. Just like you @RingEmUp I am trying to figure out how to make it fit. I have used a TM, never an HSM. Those of you out there, how do you fit an HSM to your head? How is it supposed to fit? I wear my TM loose. Should an HSM be snug? Should the forehead padding touch the forehead? To adjust the Force3 HSM snugly enough so the forehead padding touches my forehead, either the mask tilts upward instead of facing straight out from my face, or the chin pad is so tight on my jaw, it's painful (and it feels like a shot to the jaw would break my jaw!). Where does the chin pad ride on the chin? On the tip, above (perhaps covering some of the mouth), or what? I must be doing something wrong. Or does it just take time to "break in the chin padding"? Any comments would be helpful.

BRD: 127 Catch: Dead-Ball Area: Throw From OBR: Unless he falls down or loses body control, the fielder may throw from any dead-ball area.

For some reason I don't understand I was having trouble viewing the video. Maybe some others are having the same problem. Here is another link that did work for me. http://m.mlb.com/video/v217064183/coloak-homeplate-ump-takes-foul-ball-to-mask/?query=hallion