VolUmp

Welcome to the Crazy World of Umpire-Empire, BadBrad. Guest ftb2ss and Maven pretty well gave you the same and correct answers. You were largely correct, but didn't get all the details and verbiage technically correct. noumpere evidently forgot which forum he was in and gave you rather brash answers without much explanation (known as "flaming" a newcomer) instead of welcoming you. Ask The Umpire is indeed the forum where flaming is not permitted (or if common sense ruled, shouldn't be permitted) and anyone — even newbies — should feel comfortable asking any question about the game. What noumpere means in his first point by, "No, he didn't." is ... on a fly ball, unless it drops to the ground (thus, becoming a ground ball), R1 (That's the runner on 1B at the time of pitch) cannot establish 2nd base as his on a steal. To do so, he must "tag up" (re-touch) 1B at the moment of the catch (loosely stated) and then advance to 2nd safely to establish 2B as his. Otherwise, you might say he's just 90' from the established base that's his ... which is 1B. If the ball is not caught, then he is forced to give up his right to 1B and attempt to establish 2B as his. There are, of course, scenarios where a force can be removed, but that's the general gist of it. In your OP (Original Post) from ALCS Game 2, the ball was caught, so R1 was in peril until he retreated all the way back to re-touch 1B. And while we are talking about this scenario, it's worth noting another caveat that could occur. Suppose R1 was stealing on the pitch, slid into 2B, then retreated half way back to 1B thinking the ball would be caught, but then the ball drops to the ground. Even though R1 has already touched 2B, once he retreated, that force was reinstated. So, if F9 (Right Fielder) throws to F6 (Shortstop), F6 need only step on 2B to force out R1 ... just like a routine infield grounder.

Of course not. Malicious Contact. I assume you were being facetious. If the Schwarber to Contreras play is truly legal by NCAA standards, then the runner has no options other than to do what Culbertson did and try to reach through the catcher's ankles.

Does the Bugs Bunny clip depict an entirely new definition of an Immaculate Inning? 1 pitch = 3 outs? And as many times as I've seen this clip, I forgot each batter went righty-lefty-righty ..... I've already thought of the need for a new definition of an "Immaculate Inning" in the minor leagues if a pitcher throws less than 9 consecutive strikes with the "stay in the box" rule ..... Also: I've changed my mind after carefully considering all the evidence and discussion provided. I agree it's a batted ball. And this is perhaps the strongest park of your (Maven's) argument: Anything that came after that was irrelevant. You had me at "STFU."

⬆️ THIS ⬆️

Not only do I agree with this to the letter, I believe that MLB also wants to protect the officials on the field from the argument(s) ... THAT's why I didn't understand Joe Maddon's argument immediately following. No matter what, the final call is made in New York, and the Crew Chief cannot weigh in. Maddon later explained that he didn't agree that the leg was planted to block the plate without the ball, but rather, Contreras's receiving the ball pulled him into the baseline. 1) I didn't agree ... and no one cares. 2) It's still the decision of New York to overturn the out call ... no matter whether New York ruled that the throw didn't pull him into the lane, or that the runner did in fact touch the plate. Then Maddon went on to say, "But I will defend the umpires!!!" OK ... which umpires? The ones he was screaming at and who had to eject him? Was he killing the messenger to send New York his own message? I suspect he just can't stand to watch his bullpen pitch and he wanted out ...

Rich Ives, who is Mr. Blue? I don't see a post from him on this thread. I rarely disagree with you, Maven, but I would revert to common sense on this one and agree with ... ... Grayhawk. If I had to explain it that way ... the batter doesn't get two opportunities to strike at the pitch, I would feel very comfortable with or without a rule. The old 9.01c would do just fine (Is the new format 6.01c?). The best analogy I can draw is ... when a batter swings, misses, and then it hits the batter (or excuse me ... "batsman"), he's penalized because he "used up" his one allotted attempt to "strike at the pitch." The ball is only dead, albeit no INT, but no runners can advance, and only if it's strike three is he called out. I can see the argument coming up when a batter doesn't intentionally strike at the ball, when he's ducking, but doesn't get the bat down and fouls it off (or twice I've seen a ball roll fair). It's quite different in that is was his first opportunity to strike at it ... regardless of his intent.

Agreed. Don Denkinger types of mistakes. 1985 World Series Game 6 Richie Garcia (Jeffrey Maier) types of mistakes. 1996 ALCS Game 6 Jim Joyce types of mistakes. Armanda Galarraga's near-perfect game (Interesting that they're all gone from the game now). Bob Costas is louder than anyone about the "cheap out" that you're talking about ... but even moreso. It started in the World Series last year when some runners were called out at 2B on a steal where their bellies may have come off the bag for an instant while they clearly beat the throw, had their body sprawled across the bag, and his point was, instant replay's institution and then expansion had nothing whatsoever to do with these types of plays, it was from only border calls, and then from too many incorrect judgment calls on routine plays at 1B, a few catches in the outfield with runners on base that were ruled "traps," and the three infamous examples I mentioned above. *Interesting note: Yogi Berra had to stand to catch the full-count pitch that Don Larsen threw in the 1956 World Series Game 5. Nobody was gonna argue that call ... not even the Brooklyn Dodgers. **Interesting note: The Mets' first No-Hitter was pitched by Johan Santana on June 01, 2012. If Instant Replay were instituted 5 years ago, he would have thrown a one-hitter. One of the foul ball calls down the left field line (hit by Carlos Beltran) was later shown to have clearly hit the line. ***Not so interesting note: Steve Bartman was still vilified even though replay showed clearly the ball over the wall, and no fan INT should be called. At least five other guys were reaching for it and got no grief at all: It darn near happened to Mookie Betts (by a Boston fan) in RF when he robbed a home run off the bat of Josh Reddick earlier this week. https://twitter.com/ThePitcherList/status/917108299790766082/video/1 LOOK AT THE GUY in the short sleeved shirt that Mookie bumps. He's the one that was tracking the ball all the way into his hands ... everyone else knows to get the heck out of the way.

Again ... full disclosure ... I'm a Cubs fan. I never saw the angle that gave clear and indisputable proof that Rizzo got him, but Lobaton didn't put up a fight, and Darling and Johnson spoke like it was obvious when they synced two different angles of the play together, so I guess I'm happy to take them all at their word (and eyesight). What I do find interesting is, it was Joe Girardi who campaigned harder than anyone (about 4 years ago?) to expand replay ... right after he had two incidents in the post season where replay showed he got shafted. The one I specifically remember is Robbie Cano being called out at 1B (and replay showing he was safe). Girardi was very fair, very well-spoken, and very compelling. He said something like, "I'm not saying we would have won the game if Robbie was called safe ... but I like my chances! Something has to change ... there is just too much at stake." So ... now we have expanded replay and the first Manager to really goof and NOT use it was Girardi. Total class act for owning up to it the next day, but the reporter asking Joe Maddon last night why he challenged the Lobaton play ... really??? A challenge in your pocket, an elimination game with a 1-run lead, a close play in the 8th inning, and someone is ignorant enough to ask why he used it? Possibly the stupidest question of MLB 2017 post-game press conferences. Of course Maddon was polite with his answer, but if anything, I'm surprised that anyone ever leaves a challenge in their pocket anymore. Whether you like replay or not, it's now part of the game, and to not take full advantage of it is akin to strapping a 25-lb weight to your ankle to leg out an infield hit.

Full Disclosure — I'm a die hard Cubs fan — jumped ship from the Reds in the mid-90s because I refused to support Marge Schott. I couldn't agree more with your assessment. I also found it a tad bit humorous that Wieters had the gall to question the ruling after failing twice to block a pitch that led to scored Cubs' runs. And they were both scored as Wild Pitches ... yet there was no good effort on either one. (One backhand attempt ... and one right through the 5-hole). Then, before the dust had settled, committed catcher INT on LaStella. Glad they made it to the NLCS. I'd like to erase every detail of that game from my mind before tomorrow.

What did you expect? He's a "topped out" MLB Umpire ... akin to a Supreme Court Justice ... which means his mechanics, his communication skills, his level of hustle, and his rules knowledge are ALL suspect. In this case, I'm glad he at least got the rule correct even if he stumbled through the explanation. The number of MLB games in the past 4 years where a rule was misinterpreted ... with FOUR MLB umpires (or possibly a AAA callup) involved and on the field is nothing short of disgraceful. I dare say that MLB rule (mis)applications should and will be handled in a similar fashion to replay challenges soon ... where there is a mechanism for the Manager to question once per game, a rule application, and have New York hand down the ruling without having to protest the game. Then if he wins his "challenge," he retains it.

You're quite welcome, Sir Barrister. Please see that you do, Sir Barrister.

Methinks you're overthinking this because of your unusually astute IQ and Vocabulary. I read it and understood exactly what it meant, which happens often in the OBR book especially, and much of College and FED verbiage is taken directly from OBR. Why is the man at bat ALWAYS a batter until he gets hit ... when he suddenly becomes a hit batsman?? Cricket??

I suppose it can be both, but around here, Varsity Baseball Teams (Public and Private) are on very tight budgets. There is one school reknowned for not giving umpires free water. (Yeah … I said it … you know who you are.) The next Association over from mine provides 3-Man crews for every District game in the top 3 (of 5) Divisions in Tennessee. I think my Association could handle that if the schools would pony up the money. With make-ups and screwy scheduling due to weather and spring breaks, etc., it’s accepted that once in a while they will settle for a good 2-Man crew on a District Game. In my Association, with all 5 Divisions, no one does 3-Man until the Post-Season, and then it’s only the top Division District Tournament that votes for 3-Man each year. This was my 14th year … the coaches vote every year, and none of the other 4 Divisions have ever gone with 3-Man. It IS made available to them, so I’d say the answer is $$$.

Then I made the best call with the information I had at that moment of decision????? I’ll live with that. It happens every time I call a balk and the base coach has no idea why I’m advancing his “non-deceived” runner.

It's a "Do Over ..." Technically, both batter and pitcher were guilty of an infraction, but since the batter's infraction induced the pitcher's infraction, neither infraction is enforced. Place everyone back where they were at the time of the last pitch.

Is the "like" feature that has been upgraded and expanded on this forum created by a woman? I pity the Male Participant who thinks a "heart" emoji is more manly than a simple "thumbs up." Just a random comment, we ALWAYS pre-game at the HS level that the PU will look for illegal slides (or illegal non-slides), INT, OBS at 2B on a double play ball. The reason U3 is taught (in 3-man) to stand in Deep B with his shoulders squared with the 3B dugout … it is a means of helping to remind him that he has no primary responsibility at 1B. Don't look over on a pickoff attempt at 1B as though it's U3’s call (just because it is BU’s call in 2-man). U1 better have it. That's the beauty of 3-man. Since U3 never has to look at the back end of a 6-4-3 or 4-6-3 DP, he can usually have the best look at the slide and see if he catches OBS, INT, illegal slides, etc, (Another point we pregame when doing 3-man). Districts at Top Level Programs should get consistent in all states and demand 3-man for regular season District games. There is just too much riding on it, and we don't have replay. Most officials here love working 3-man, and would give up even more of their paycheck to work 3-man (as compared to the 2-man fee) in a District game. —————— TENNESSEE RATES —————— $75.00 … 2-Man Fee per Official = $150 $70.00 … 3-Man Fee per Official = $210 $60 Disparity ———————————————————————— $75.00 … 2-Man Fee per Official = $150 $60.00 … 3-Man Fee per Official = $180 $30 Disparity (What I plan to propose) That’s about the cost of 5 baseballs. If the school can’t afford that, maybe each team should have a parent from the home team provide the $30 on a rotating basis starting with parents of Seniors.

I'd explained my question to him precisely as I did on this post ... as multiple players being protected at the same time. I do comprehend the idea that the protection can change. It actually happened to me once in a JV game several years ago. 2 outs and R2. Pop up almost directly over the head of F5. F6 was moving toward it and calling for it (calling off F5). R2 ran into F6, I had INT, but F5 caught the ball — essentially making my call moot.

Both appreciated. R1 was most definitely hindered, and maybe I initially saw it as incidental contact, but he made it easily to 2B. I wish, if for no other reason than to shore up my confidence, I’d called OBS as it was moot in the end. My reason for asking #2 was the lack of clarification I find in the FED books. (Agreed that it’s all spelled out in OBR). NOW ... I don’t call college, but I only go to college camps, and my most recent and well-known instructor “corrected” me on this question and said, “You may indeed protect more than one fielder.” (Sigh …) Is the rule any different in college ball, or is he just mistaken?

FED Game. 0 outs. R1 and R2. Batter pops a trouble ball into very shallow RF. R1 collides with F3 in his first step toward 2B. Between F3, F4, and F9, no one had a legit chance at it, although if I had to pick one, I’d pick F4 as having the best shot at it. I’m PU. We called nothing (other than everyone’s safe) on the play. No IFF (lack of ordinary effort), No Runner INT on R1 (Judged F3 had no chance). No OBS on F3 (I think I should have). Ball dropped. Everybody moved up. I have three questions: 1) From my description, did I miss an OBS call? 2) Supposing the pop up was easily catchable by BOTH F3 and F4, may I protect both fielders in FED and call INT? 3) Supposing the pop up was easily catchable by BOTH F3 and F4, may I protect both fielders in OBR?

BR. Sorry again. (Corrected above)

Well FUDGE. I actually did this without looking at my own OP and I stated it precisely backwards. B & C, R1 BR is placed at TOI. A, D, R1 BR to 2B most likely.

No one is placing the BR. I assume he goes to 2B on B & C and back to 1B on A & D. See my new post below. I had this exactly backwards because I forgot the sequence of my own OP (or is that PO???) I think I have a good handle on all four now, and I could have come up with about 8 scenarios. Thanks for all who contributed. **Note: My intent in D was NO MC, but POSSIBLE INT call, which would change the outcome.

In 49 other states, would you only call him out on proper appeal by the defense? I seem to recall SC can still call runners out without an appeal for missed bases, leaving early, etc. So on the Allen Craig game ending play, he never tried to touch the plate after being awarded home on OBS. Are you implying in OBR he would have been called out on proper appeal by the defense?

Gentlemen, I’m going to re-post my FED OBS Case Play with a better and clearer OP and try to find a consensus on the four separate rulings ... a “poll” if you will ... • — • — • — • — • — • — • — • — • FED Game. No outs. R2. (Man on 2nd) Batter hits clean base hit in the left-center gap. R2 runs into F6, gathers himself, and continues running. BU calls and points, “THAT’s OBS.” BR rounds 1B and heads for 2B when F9 throws to F2 at the plate on one hop. R2 rounded 3B and was waved in to score, and was beaten by the ball by nearly two steps. Please make your complete rulings in all four of the following scenarios including outs (or not), penalties (or not), and runner placement(s). In all four cases, assume that at the conclusion of the play, BU judged that R2 would have scored on the base hit were it not for the OBS by F6. A — R2, seeing he has no chance at scoring, jumps sideways to avoid F2’s tag. No tag is made and PU judges R2 was still in the baseline, but R2 never touched the plate. He ran directly to the dugout. B — R2 led with his shoulder and ran over F2 touching the plate after the collision. C — R2 jumped over F2, who was down on one knee preparing to make the tag, and touched the plate. R2 made no contact with F2. D — R2 ran hard right to within one step of F2 without sliding, then pulled up to try to stop himself and bumped shoulders with F2 as R2 was tagged. F2 was not injured, but he dropped the ball to the ground … and while reaching for it, R2 touched the plate. A) B) C) D)

We could all pick nits about your mechanics, game management, level of effort, etc. etc. etc. I don’t consider BI to be an extremely rare or uncommon call. It’s actually an easier call to make in your case because the batter was already out on the strikeout — (no waiting to see the call at 2B). It was indeed a no-brainer, and you are not obligated to explain loudly enough for the camera’s audio mic to pick it up, and the coach is the one who “blew it.” Again, only because he didn’t like the call … not because he really doesn’t know the rule. Young punks like him are doing no favors fostering a culture of good sportsmanship to a team of teens, and he doesn’t get a free pass to personally insult an official. The “blue/blew” joke is older than the hills. If this were played strictly by FED Rules, I would have restricted him, and my guess is ejected him 40 seconds later.