-
Posts
5,881 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
164
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Articles
Reviews
Everything posted by Richvee
-
Hard to tell if the slide was late and there was contact prior to a leg and buttocks on the ground. That would make it an illegal slide. Also hard to tell if F4 was off to the side of the bag and contacted ( violation) or on top of the bag. (Legal contact. ) Sliding through the bag is only a violation if the contact is beyond the bag.
-
OK. So the consensus is this is nothing. I’ve been convinced
-
That would be a cheap bet. House is paid in full. But your point is well taken. Especially at some of the places you and I will be this spring.
-
Someone let me know if I'm wrong , but I believe same as NCAA. (It's amazing I do virtually no games under OBR now. All FED for high school and tourneys and NCAA.)
-
And what's your rule backup for that? If we're using has to be intentional, we can point to D3K for a FED game. What do we point to as the reason for it needs to be intentional for NCAA? I can't buy "Intentionally interferes with a throw".
-
In FED the D3K interface needs to be intentional. NCAA, any hindrance by the BR kills it and the BR is out.
-
Playing devils advocate because I really don’t know what is the correct call here, or if it would vary by code. Given that NCAA says on a D3K, if the batter runner “clearly hinders F2’s attempt to make a play on the ball, he’s out.” Would you have an out on the BR in NCAA? If not, what would be your rational for a “that’s nothing” call here?
-
I sent mine in last time. It was a needed adjustment. I’ll get through this year counting two seconds. Next year the device should be all but obsolete with all divisions required to have visible clocks.
-
However this isn’t interference with a thrown ball. It’s with a catcher’s fielding. He's a runner. Agree. So this isn’t BI. it’s not a batted ball, so this isn’t tangle:untangle It’s not a D3K. So “BR is out if he clearly hinders the catcher” doesn’t necessarily apply.
-
Granted. But pretty irrelevant on this play.
-
It’s ball 4 . How can you obstruct a guy taking an awarded base?
-
And herein lies the problem. We’ve got rules for D3K, batter interference, but really nothing that explicitly applies to a miss played ball 4. I tend to agree we need intent to have anything here. However, any cite we use - no matter how we rule- has a hole in it.
-
I didn’t think I’d be a fan of it. But after watching the SEC tournament last year, I think it’s time has come.
-
https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1B2aXBeSrr/?mibextid=wwXIfr Im sure many have seen this clip floating around the social media interwebs. I think it’s worth a discussion. Do we have batter/ runner interference? Tangle/ untangle? Different for different codes? Seems any rule we apply doesn’t really address a batter runner who is awarded 1b and hinders a catcher on a miss played ball 4. Do we need intent? Do we call interference only if the BR CLEARLY hinders the catcher?
-
I e been informed that none of the conferences I umpire are using the double 1b this year. I’m curious has to how many conferences are going to use it.
-
Are you looking for advice on how to get started, or have you found an association or league that is going to give you games this season and looking for on field advice?
-
I’m more than capable of feeling/hearing the ten second buzz, then counting off two seconds before calling a batter violation.
-
Great read!
-
Ha! I never even noticed that. I usually miss a "which one is NOT true", or I miss read pivot and free foot. Add offense and defence to the list
-
Wrong application of a FED rule that's rarely called. 6-4-d(1) My note- There's 3 different actions in the rule a,b,andc...I'm giving only the applicable part here, b. If the pitcher with runners on base stops or hesitates in the delivery of a pitch because the batter steps out of the box......(b) with both feet....it shall not be balk.....in (b), a strike shall be called on the batter for violating 7-3-1. in (b) If the pitcher legally delivers the ball, it shall be called a strike and the ball remains live. Thus, 2 strikes are called on the batter in (b) 7-3-1 states a strike shall be called when a batter delays the game by stepping out of the batter's box when one of the 8 exceptions do not apply. My only comment on possibly missing the start of a windup with his hands from your view behind the plate...Don't sweat this working alone is tough, you need to focus on the pitch, like you said, you were hyper focused on his feet, which is 100% understandable given the situation of a pitcher in the windup with R1. I'd be looking there too expecting a switch from the windup to set without proper disengagement. 0
-
If that’s how they want called, fine. My gripe is FED has had ten years to clarify the rule, make it a POE, but they opted to say nothing. Then he puts out a memo and blames umpires for lack of enforcement.
-
It’s been ten years since these videos. I think the consensus at the time was “this must not be what they really mean. If it was, they would amend the rule and delete the last half of the sentence in 8.4.1(g)1”. So we’ve gone on for 9 years, never seeing a POE, or rule edit to confirm the ‘15 video interps. Nine years! Nine years to fix the rule so it doesn’t conflict with their interpretation. But Hopkins does nothing. Until the spring of ‘24 when he releases a memo and blames the confusion on umpires for not knowing the rule, or being afraid to enforce it fearing pushback. Straight from the memo…. “3) Umpires (if aware) will only address the running lane violation, but not deal with the advancing runner(s) who benefitted from this offensive gamesmanship and rule violation.” Really? This is an insult to any competent high school umpire who dedicates their time and energy to learning and enforcing the rules as written, and doing the job to the best of their abilities. Yeah, this hits a nerve with me. Sorry for the rant.
-
But FED's changes do not seem to promote better safety. I still requires a throw, it still has the same narrow lane with a runner running to same narrow base located outside the lane. I'm pretty sure schools can afford a fourth base and a can of spray paint.....Or have them laying around somewhere. If not I'm not to sure they should be fielding a team.
-
Our first meeting is not until February. I don't even want to bring it up unless they do...Then I can plead ignorance to the new interp and call it correctly. the same way as before.
-
Wonderful... While MLB makes the bases bigger and expands the running lane to the grass line, and NCAA starts it's way into the world of the double first base on a larger scale...all in the name of safety and leading to LESS calls of the controversial RLI....the FED pivots and says "We're gonna have you guys call it even when there's no interference."...SMH