Jump to content

maven

Established Member
  • Content Count

    8,159
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    269

maven last won the day on September 9

maven had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

4,785 Excellent

4 Followers

About maven

  • Rank
    Rules Interpreter

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Neck o' the Woods, OH

More information about you

  • Your Association Name
    SUA

Recent Profile Visitors

11,410 profile views
  1. maven

    hypothetical

    True. It last happened legally in 1870, but absolutely true.
  2. maven

    Infield fly

    ...by the runner's actions, or successfully appealed by the defense.
  3. The tight restriction on the batter ends when F2 fails to secure the pitch from his position (WP, passed ball). At that point, the batter must attempt to avoid hindering play given time and opportunity. This may require him to move away from the plate area and the likely direction of the throw. In FED, this looser restriction appears in 7-3-5d, where the batter may be guilty of batter INT for "failing to make a reasonable effort to vacate a congested area when there is a throw to home plate and there is time for the batter to move away."
  4. maven

    Batting Out of Order?

    That happens if 1 batter is skipped, but not if 2 batters are skipped. If #3 is up and #5 bats improperly and singles, then the defense appeals, #3 is out, #5 is removed from base, and #4 would bat.
  5. Sorry, somehow I became convinced that this thread was about appeal plays, not reversing umpire judgment. Yes, all codes allow umpires to "fix" the situation after a judgment call is reversed. This can include placing runners, calling outs, and scoring or unscoring runs. Carry on!
  6. By leaving the batter's box (or making "any other movement" than swinging at the pitch), the batter makes himself liable to batter INT. Had he been legally in the box and been hit by that throw, it would be nothing. In this case, by hindering the play on R2 while out of the box, the batter is guilty of batter INT. The batter is out, and (if less than 2 outs) R2 returns to 2B. Same ruling all codes.
  7. maven

    NVR SEEN B4

    L33T is not baseball, it's gamer/hacker code. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leet https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=l33t
  8. maven

    sac fly

    A force play occurs when a runner is forced to advance by the batter becoming a runner. No force play is possible on a caught fly ball. The play you're asking about is an appeal play. The defense may appeal a runner leaving too early by tagging the runner or the base left too early. This is NOT a force play. However, according to your account, R2 did NOT leave too early: she left after the fielder touched the ball. In that case, there's no appeal, and she's just a runner off base. To be put out, the runner must be tagged in that case.
  9. maven

    NVR SEEN B4

    It might matter. FED is stricter about this. HS rules have a case play where the batter throws his bat after ball 4, strikes the ball, and allows runners to advance. IIRC it's ruled interference. If you were going to call someone out for INT here, you'd always want to call out the player who committed the infraction (unless he's already out, say for a strikeout, and then you could get the other guy). Also: please, no L33T here.
  10. Yes, there's a FED equivalent, but that's not the applicable rule. 8.02(c) (and FED 10-something) applies to judgment calls that are overturned. The question concerns appeal plays and counting a run without an appeal. An appeal play is not the overturn of a previous ruling: in granting an appeal, we're not saying that earlier we judged that he touched the base. The operative principle is that a runner is credited with acquiring a base legally by touching it; he is also credited with acquiring it if he passes it until the defense properly appeals the missed base. The last part is, IIRC, interpretation, not black letter rule. I'm still mad that FED cut off my access to the rule book through Arbiter, so I'm not looking it up using my paper book. 8-2-6 (the appeal rule) might say this explicitly.
  11. maven

    Runner stealing home

    That's not how to explain it, because it's legal for F1 to throw home without disengaging. It's called pitching. But when he's engaged, all the restrictions apply. When F1 throws the ball to the batter, it's a pitch, so he has to come set before throwing it. In this case, it seems he didn't, which is a balk.
  12. maven

    Ejection

    Does he have a case? No. Will that stop him?
  13. maven

    Interference

    Can't be IFF: 2B was unoccupied. Random people (or voices in the head) shouting "infield fly" are irrelevant to the correct call. Unless noumpere's followup turns up anything, this is a double play, 5-4-3.
×
×
  • Create New...