Richvee

Let me know if you can do this for an hour and a half at age 75.

I saw this the other day. He makes excellent points. It’s reality of today’s music industry. Rock, as we know (knew?) it is almost 100% underground now.

You're not wrong. But there is good rock and roll out there. Prog included. You just have to search it out yourself. Here's a "newer" band ( been around about ten years). Southern Empire. I think you'll dig it. https://youtu.be/hNOPBWy_4g0?si=yRixgpYoJyVKTZJx

It's not a holograph show. It's Carl Palmer, with a bass player, and a guitarist who makes the guitar sound amazingly similar to Keith Emerson's keyboards. The bass player also sings, and sounds a lot like Lake. The large screen is full of clips of Keith and Greg. The large screen also shows a live performance of a keith Emerson solo from the glory years, and a Greg Lake live version of Luck Man. Carl is still an amazing drummer, and the show was outstanding. I highly recommend it for any ELP fan. Oh.. and you should have stopped listening when you got to "Love Beach"

Pretty much what I said last weekend

I'm thinking if you're lining up the runner with the touch of the glove, aren't we pretty much on the same sightline as R3? I'd guess if U3 thought F5 was obstructing, U3 himself would have been impeded on that same sightline and would have needed to adjust. Since U3 got the same look of the play as R3, and didn't need to adjust left or right, that would mean F5 wasn't hindering R3 either. .

The only place the outcome is "correct" is in your mind. And in the minds of others who don't know the rule, or are using the MSU rulebook. .

That’s all we need to know. What F4 could have/could not have done is not part of the judgement here. He had a chance be to make a play on the ball…. End of story.

The rule doesn’t say “another fielder has a chance to retire a runner.’

U3 and PU should have clearly seen F4 in position

But F4 WS right behind them. I think they kicked this one.

There’s a bit of a loophole in the rule as I understand it. Let’s assume he had not disengaged yet during this AB. F1 can step off. Do nothing. That’s his one disengagement. Restart the clock. F1 steps off, lobs a non competitive throw to 2nd or 3B. Violation.

That's the more likely answer

Perhaps it was second disengagement?

They got it right. These two clowns with the microphones are priceless. The only thing they said that was right was they think the HC was saying he stepped off the rubber 1. “Really late call” 2.”even if it doesn’t work out an effective argument by Landers” 3. These guys are amateurs … not SEC umpires. They go to work and come here on the weekends “ (I didn’t know D1 SEC umpires don’t have full time jobs) 3. “Maybe they don’t know the rules” (😡😡) 4. “this is what you don’t want to see” (right - we don’t want to see crews getting together and getting the call right) 5. “doesnt happen in the majors or minors” (yup - no crew consulting allowed there) 6. “last thing you want to see” (yeah last thing you want to see is the correct call applied) 8. AND THE PIECE DE RESISTANCE “wish they got every call right but that’s not gonna happen until they get the robots in” 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣can’t wait for that balk calling robot!!🤣🤣🤣🤣

FIFY

But he didn’t. Can’t put the toothpaste back on the tube.

Yup.

That's on the coach for not knowing the rule. We can't "let him off the hook" and let his runner go back to 3B because the coach didn't know the rule. I was surprised NJ didn't make a bigger issue out of it. It was a HUGE (no)call....Dare I say MSU call?

Not a "problem".. Just softball-ish IMO. I like to see a little more individuality. Watching MD/DE right now...I think that was the first U2 I saw not give a robotic out hammer on a can of corn to F8...Refreshing 😎

I do not have access to a clip, but I'm sure some saw it. Top 7, 2nd and 3rd, wild pitch, R3 scores, R2 heading into 3B is obstructed by R5, and U3 calls it. 3B coach sees this, sends R2 home, and he's out by a country mile. Next thing I see is R2 put back at 3B... and no out (or run) recorded?? Anyone else see this? Anyone have an explanation?

Not just PU..Every call is robotic. I don't think I've seen a BU sell a call yet.

I think this is the key for how this was handled/interpreted. When it mentions coaches, it doesn't say the coach is warned or ejected for the actions of the plyer. The coach himself would have to be accused of relaying the stolen signs. It's not like FED's illegal bat where the coach goes for the player's actions.

He’s not the catcher until he’s been behind the dish catching live pitches. How’s that?

It's a rule that will get the catcher ready quicker 99% of the time. Your's was a one-off situation. As for changing the catcher next inning, if you're following FED rules, it's the catcher/pitcher of record. It's usually the other way around though. F3 doubles, he's slow as can be. Coach wants a courtesy runner because he's going to catch/pitch next inning....Nope.