Richvee

Interesting. I never officiated hoops but I played all through high school and I know a little about the sport. My son played youth football, basketball, and baseball through middle school and baseball in high school. I've seen good officials, and some bad. Misapplications of baseball rules drove me nuts, but I always tried to keep my cool. (Only once did I have to walk away from a ballfield, but that's a story for a different thread) By far the worst officiating, and most blatant mistakes came in the youth hoops games. There were more than a few occasions I had to get up and walk out of the gym because I knew if I stuck around any longer I would have been "asked" to leave. No doubt it's a tough sport to officiate. Especially little kids, but, my oh my...the inconsistencies, poor judgment, and poor rules knowledge I saw in youth basketball drove me batty!!

Came across this today and I'm looking for some clarification. 3.1.1... For discovery of an illegal player (2-36-3) on offense by an umpire or either team, that player shall be called out and restricted to the bench/dugout for the duration of the game.... ....If the player should score a run, advance or cause a play to be made that allows another runner(s) to advance, discovery must be made by an umpire or either team before the first pitch to the next batter of either team. This would invalidate the action of the illegal offensive player. Any out(s) made on the play stands and all other runners return to the base(s) occupied at the time of the pitch. Case play 3.1.1 SITUATION G: With two outs and an illegal substitute on second base, B4 hits a home run out of the park. Before the next pitch, the illegal substitute is discovered. RULING: The illegal substitute is called out and restricted to the bench. No runs score, since the out on the runner at second base was the third out. The home run is nullified. B4 leads off the next inning. My question...Just to make sure I'm understanding this correctly.... In the case play, are we to assume the illegal sub entered the game as a pinch runner at 2nd? Otherwise, if he was an illegal sub pinch hitting, for example, and doubled to end up on 2nd, wouldn't that be considered "advancing" and therefore he would have had to be "discovered" before the first pitch to B4 in order to "invalidate" his action?

Agree. Also agree with "when in Rome" as far as association "rules" go. ^^^^This^^^, is a lot different than the "Find another association, I'm doing it my way anyway" attitude in some posts.

Exactly why I think, at least early in the youth travel season, it wouldn't be a bad idea to bring this up at the pregame. Better to remind everybody of the new rule, then inevitably hear complaints the 1st time you call it.

Maybe similar to Oakley where authorized dealers cannot sell them at a discount.

http://www.amazon.com/Native-Eyewear-Dash-Sunglass-Replacement/dp/B007YGHNDU

Essilor has recently come out with a Transition lens that is polarized when it darkens called Vantage. . Quite a big breakthough in the optical world. (Not available from Oakley yet )

yep. It's all the same technology. Transitions is actually a trademarked name of the technology made by a company called Essilor. All Transition lenses are actually Essilor lenses, and then processed by other optical companies for their frames, Rx orders, etc.

FED casebook 5.1.1 SITUATION L: F7, while attempting to catch a fly ball near dead-ball area (a) makes the catch with one foot on the dead-ball area line and the other foot in dead-ball area, or (b) makes the catch with both feet in the dead-ball area, or © makes the catch with both feet in the playing area and then steps with both feet or falls into the dead-ball area. RULING: In (b) and ©, the ball becomes dead. In (a) and ©, it is a legal catch, but in ©, F7 has left the playing area and if there are any runners on base, they each are awarded one base. In (b), it is not a catch. (8-3-3d)

Transitions are available in Oakleys. I haven't seen them yet in "off the shelf" Oakley frames, but an optician who is an authorized Oakley dealer can order Transition lenses to go into almost all Oakley frames...Both Rx and non Rx. They work well outside. They get dark grey in the sun, and they will get almost clear inside. I don't own a pair, so I'm not sure what the lenses might do under the lights in a night game. My guess would be they stay rather clear. If you buy them and plan on using them as sunglasses in you car..DON'T DO IT. Transitions will not change behind the windshield of you car. UV light activates them, and your car windshield blocks those UV rays.

Thanks for the update. Interested to see the exact wording.

Welcome!

Same here. First time I read it, I swear it said batter.

----------------------------- Or the worst curveball... ever. Under baserunning awards, each runner is awarded one base for a balk or if a runner is struck by a pitch. Yes...So 31 = True

So who called the 3rd out @2nd if BU thought the flyball was out 3#?

Nah... he's still upset about the beating the Giants put on them. Wrong Cabrerra. This is Asdrubal getting tossed. https://view.vzaar.com/1153472/player

Last year we finally switched from a paper-based mail in to our associatin test, to the NJSIAA test on line via arbiter. This year's should be out any day now.

haha. We do too.Every year, have to watch the same video.

AT that price you can't go wrong, but they can't be more than a polycarbonate lens with a tint. If they work for you, great. However I doubt they're polarized or have any type of ant-reflective coating.

That's some crazy stuff. Although I will say there are times we will have PU call fair/foul on the RF line even with no runners on. We've got some fields with little or no lines past the bases. PU has a better "line" by lining the fly ball up with the 1st base bag. Pregamed of course..Usually while we're walking up to the field and notice no foul lines past the bag

Song- Centerfield Movie- Tough call. Bull Durham, Bad News Bears, The Sandlot, Major League. Too tough to choose one... Team- Yankees Moment- '76 ALCS. Chambliss HR. Section 220, row 18. Fifteen years old and running around the field after the game. I'l never forget standing in short centerfield and looking in at home plate, and the 3 tiers of stands behind it. Coolest feeling in the world...(well...ONE of the coolest )

So, does the answer mean this is not a K? Yep. So if the batter is pulling back and the ball strikes the bat, we've got a hit or foul and NOT a bunt attempt. Chalk up another situation that may arise that I now know how to correctly rule thanks to this site!

I think/hope what they're trying to eliminate is confusion. You know how half the stadium yells, "Balk!" when a pitcher does the feint to third and then feint first move? We're probably never going to get smarter fans, but we might make easier rule. Why is first base special? Eliminate feints to all the bases or allow it to all the bases. I guess it's easier to to say no feints from the rubber, period. I just think you're changing more rules than need be to get the play you want eliminated. My point is why change anything regarding 2nd base? That would have nothing to do with what you are trying to accomplish through a rule change.

Why? Well, because I don't think there's any problem with the rules regarding pick offs to 2nd. Actually, I don't think there's any problem with the rule as it stands now, but if they want to eliminate 1st to 3rd, not allowing a feint from the rubber to either of the corner bases seems the most logical, straight forward, easiest to implement answer. It's the 1st to 3rd move they're trying to eliminate. Why change any other rules about pickoff attempts @2nd?

^^^ This. So much this. Simpler is better. Keep it simple unless there's a compelling reason to make it complex. My thoughts are keep 2nd base out of this. No feints to 1st or 3rd from the rubber.