umpire_scott

I'm not being difficult. Rather than saying apples and oranges please explain why it's apples and oranges. I truly would like to understand what the difference is.

they're not playing on my field with shirt untucked. Period. With all due respect why would you be adamant about a shirt being tucked in, but not about a batting glove being fastened?

So UKCE1861 says standard FED mechanics is B only with runner on 1st. Trout and JaxRolo say B with runner on 1st or runners on 1st and 3rd. The head of my umpires association said the following: Mechanics: (These are what I have learned in different clinics and from other officials.) The umpire is to only be in "C" when third base is in danger of being stolen. In all other instances with runners on base, the umpire should be in "B". With that being said, not ALL officials do that, and some prefer to be in "C" if the bases are loaded or with runners on 2nd and 3rd. I prefer to do it the way the book says, which is only being in "C" when third base is in danger of being stolen. Who is right?

No he did not pass him up prior to the catch. Basically both players were standing by first base when the catch was made. R1 stayed there, while BR tagged up and went towards second. It clearly was the BR intentionally staying on the field during live-ball action with the express purpose of altering play through his actions. The question is whether there is a definite rule that can be applied? The offensive coach likened it to the BR rounding first on a fly ball. What about when a BR runs towards first on an obviously caught third strike? If the catcher makes a play on him it's still a live ball and runners can advance. But he clearly broke hard for second, and was stopped at first to begin with. He clearly was trying to give the impression that he was R1.

I'm confused. Who is out for "abandoning his effort to run the bases"?

He stayed at first. He had no chance to advance as the fly was to medium right field. But a fielder seeing someone tag up is going to throw to second out of instinct. They aren't going to check players to see if it's the batter or the runner.

Yeah, probably wrong choice of words there. I just have an issue when players that are obviously out put themselves into the field of play in order to confuse the defense. I would also like to see a rule change or emphasis regarding non-dropped third strikes. I understand that the catcher has to know the situation, but oftentimes fans/coaches are yelling to throw to first even when it's not called for. I've seen coaches tell their kids to run to first base on any strike in the dirt in an attempt to draw a throw from the catcher to first base, so they could advance another runner.

I agree that it's bush league. I've even had other umpires say they would throw the kid out for unsportsmanlike conduct. I would not go that far, but I'd love if there was some rule that could be interpreted into not allowing this type of play.

I was doing a high school JV game by myself about a year ago. Situation: Runners on first and third, one out. Batter hits a high fly ball to medium right field. I'm watching third for the tag up and RF for the catch. RF catches the ball, both runners tag-up. The throw has no chance at getting the runner coming home and is cut off by the first baseman near the pitchers mound. The runner going to second is an easy out. The first baseman throw to second, but the runner stops, and heads back to the dugout. It is at this point that I realize that the runner going to second was actually the batter, not the runner from first. Let me be clear that he did not simply round first. He ran down to first, stopped, and pretended to be the runner tagging up to draw the throw away from home plate and towards second. The defensive coach calls time and wants an interference ruling called on the runner for pretending to tag up. Having never seen this occur I was somewhat perplexed. The defensive coach likened it to a fake tag play by the defense. I was not sure how to rule, but I told the defensive coach that since there was no chance to put the runner out going home, and that that the runner pretending to be tagging up was already out, I would not rule interference. The offensive coach who was at third base overheard the conversation and said this it's not interference. He said it's a legal play and his team coaches their players to do this. I've looked this up to see if there are any rules interpretations that could be applied to this. There is a rule (I've forgotten which rules book it's under. It might even be softball) that states runners cannot congregate at a base to confuse the defense. Interference could be called in this case. How would you interpret this?