Jump to content

maven

Established Member
  • Posts

    9,014
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    329

Everything posted by maven

  1. I'm not talking about confidence in my belief or rules knowledge, but personal confidence—authority, field presence, that kind of thing. Newer umpires especially often confuse the two.
  2. I agree that if there's anything to dispute it's that F5 BOTH tagged R2 AND tagged 3B. Unfortunately, he tagged R2 first, yielding the 3rd out of the inning. If they want that apparent 4th out, then we need a little more than stepping on 3B as he's tagging R2. He does stay on there a while, but I'd like something more: pointing to R3, verbally appealing—anything to indicate that the action around the base is supposed to be TWO appeals rather than just one. That's the bottom line for me: I see enough to know that F5's actions are a deliberate appeal, but not enough to know that his actions are TWO DISTINCT appeals. And I'll add: I'm not a pro umpire, so I don't have an official opinion about whether the ruling in the video was right. For amateur ball, whether I grant the second appeal will depend on which ruling gets me to beer o'clock faster.
  3. What we allow we condone. You allowed that coach to: "come out on EVERY close play" [too often] "come charging out" [must request time first] "yelling at me" [must use a respectful tone] "He argued" [no arguing] "loudly yelling, not being passionate, but being an azzhat" [sounds like prolonged] "went back-and-forth a few times" [spinning your wheels] After all that, and from his viewpoint out of the blue, you dumped him. Some suggestions for game management: Enforce good behavior first: I won't even talk to a coach who storms out yelling. Make him stop, explain that if he comes out again without requesting time you'll eject him, and require that he speak to you in a quiet respectful tone. This demand and threatened consequence should be uttered so softly that only the coach standing right next to you can hear it. Then: "what did you see, Bob?" I'm assuming that you announced the double set when you called the balk, so he knows why you called it. Letting him talk first allows him to say his piece. Stop him when he gets loud again or starts repeating himself. At that point, reiterate your ruling: "Bob, I hear what you're saying, but what he did is clearly a double set. Now let's play ball." Discussion over, turn around and return to your position. Send him back to the dugout if he follows you, and dump him if he persists (one of the 3 'P's'). There's no back and forth: what's the point of that? Don't mention "all codes," because only 1 is relevant. And I'm not listening to him disagree—he's entitled to think I'm wrong, but we're not going to postpone restarting the game so that he can rant. Don't fall into the trap of thinking that you're going to convince him you're right. This desire is a function of lack of confidence: be right, and it won't matter so much to you that some daddy-ball coach thinks you're wrong . Good luck!
  4. maven

    Pitching

    As long as something is moving, the leg may hang. In amateur baseball, when F1 hangs the leg he usually stops moving everything—freezes—which is not legal.
  5. Unless the runner did something intentional to get hit, we play on. If the deflected ball goes out of play, all runners are awarded 2 bases from their last legally touched base at the time of the throw (not the time it goes out of play).
  6. maven

    Hit by pitch

    I'll add one: 4. The ball was dead.
  7. Good call. Teenagers need their sleep.
  8. Sounds like the umpire was confused with the live-ball balk rule (might be trained for HS rules). With a live-ball balk, we either enforce the balk and have no pitch, or we ignore the balk (because the batter and all runners reached their advance bases on the play. In this play, because the batter fouled off the pitch, we enforce the balk (advance runners) and it's no pitch.
  9. maven

    Obstruction

    I'm reading this question as something like: R2, batter hits a grounder to maybe F5, and R2 gets hung up between 2B and 3B. He's then obstructed during the rundown. In that case, he's entitled to 3B in all codes (whether the ball is dead immediately varies by code). The BR is entitled to the last base legally touched: if he had reached 2B when the ball becomes dead, then he can stay. If not, back to 1B. As he wasn't obstructed, he's not entitled to any award. Different codes handle OBS differently (pro ball has 2 kinds, HS ball just one), but they don't differentiate "degrees of severity" of OBS. The infraction can be accidental/negligent or intentional, but the penalty is the same. If it rises to the level of malicious contact, then both the OBS penalty and the MC penalty would be applied. And we might talk about "severity" of penalty: obstructed runners are awarded bases to nullify the act of obstruction, which could be any number of bases (less than 4).
  10. Nobody applies every rule exactly as written. You'd never get assigned a game if you were that guy. That said, yes, we want to do it right. But why not grant the appeal here? Because, "technically, the ball's not in play until I put it in play." If the explanation starts with "technically," then we should probably rethink our application of that rule.
  11. maven

    Wacky play

    Sorry, yes, in that instance, the TOT and the time the ball goes out of play coincide.
  12. For the love of the dog, get the damn out any way you can.
  13. The umpire might have had a different judgment about the BR being in the running lane. If the BR is out of the lane for most of it, then moves back in to reach 1B, and only at that point hinders the fielder taking the throw, it's still RLI. He doesn't get credit for being in the lane at the moment of impact if he's out for most of the play, esp. at the time the ball is thrown.
  14. maven

    Wacky play

    No. All awards are either TOP or TOT (except some INT, which is TOI). The term 'Throw' in 'Time of Throw' includes all modalities of propelling a baseball.
  15. "The obstructed runner shall be awarded at least one base beyond the base he had last legally touched before the obstruction."
  16. maven

    Wacky play

    Yes, one base for catch & carry is TOP. No, 2 bases is from TOT, or time of throw, not the time the ball enters DBT. For FED, there's a useful table of base awards after rule 8-2.
  17. maven

    Appeal goes wrong

    I didn't have that throw as part of the appeal.
  18. I'm awarding HP in play 1, and 3B in play 2, regardless of code. As I'm envisioning it, these would be the "expected calls" for both plays. The base award is made in order to nullify the act of OBS: as described, the runner likely reaches the next base without the OBS, so award that. Benefit of the doubt goes to the offended team (the offense here). The only difference the code makes is whether the ball is dead immediately—in codes with two types of OBS, such as OBR, it's type 1; in FED, all OBS is delayed dead.
  19. maven

    Appeal goes wrong

    Some umpires might wonder what the mechanic is for "a request for a second appeal on the same runner at the same base shall not be allowed by the umpire." I recommend NOT to rule on the appeal: we're not ruling that the runner touched the base, and merely signaling safe will be interpreted that way. To do that would not be disallowing the appeal, but denying it. If the miss was obvious, then we look like chumps. Rather, my approach is to kill it, shake my head no, and point at the pitcher to indicate the fielder should throw it back (I'll verbalize "you can't appeal," but not very loudly). This mechanic looks like "disallowing," even from a distance. The defensive coach will likely come out (and I've called time, so, fine), and I'll explain it to him. (Can't quite do it in 5 words: "can't appeal again after the error.")
  20. That sounds like a folk etymology to me. More likely due to shirt color: black became common/dominant only in the last 20 years or so, previously umpires generally wore blue.
  21. Depends on who says it. From him, it's an EJ: From her, I'll allow it:
  22. Once again demonstrating the need to know the rules, not judging "what they should be doing." That non-rule-book phrase might cause more incorrect rulings (no-calls) than any other.
×
×
  • Create New...