Jump to content


Established Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Days Won


Everything posted by maven

  1. maven

    Canseco type play

    When a fly ball strikes a fielder in fair territory, it becomes a fair ball. When a fair batted ball leaves live ball territory, it becomes dead, and the batter is entitled to an award. If it leaves on the foul side of the pole, it's a 2-base award ("ground rule double"). This is the case whether or not it is still in flight (that is, if it touches the ground before becoming dead). If it leaves on the fair side of the pole after touching the ground, then it is also a 2-base award. If it leaves on the fair side in flight, 4 bases (HR). Same ruling, all codes.
  2. I hope he gets the help before he gets another job coaching children. And I really hope you reported this behavior to the AD and the state. From your account, it sounds as if this individual already had his second chance.
  3. Although this is the most charitable interpretation so far, it is not the most probable.
  4. Yeah, like that's never happened to any of us.
  5. maven

    3rd out

    Must be the off season.
  6. Sure there is. It's called the criminal code.
  7. As a clarification of the case play, where the illegal sub is a runner, this is fine. The rule is a bit more complicated, as illegal subs can be in the game on offense (on base OR at bat) as well as on defense. Any time illegal subs are in the game and on the field, they can be appealed. If in the game and they leave the field (scored or out, say), or if they're replaced (by a re-entering starter or another sub), the opponent has until the next pitch to appeal.
  8. The interp's reference to an unnatural movement is another example of batter INT; the previous clause mentions stepping out of the box. These are not the only examples, so the fact that the OP batter's action does not satisfy either description is not sufficient to show that it's not batter INT. It can be helpful to focus on what the batter INT rule is aiming to protect: the batter has an opportunity to swing at the pitch, and to complete that action. That's what he's there for, and if that's all he does and he happens to get in F2's way and hinder the throw, too bad for the defense. (Safe signal + "That's nothing!") If he does anything else AND hinders F2's play, then he's liable for batter INT. I believe that this approach to the rule explains all the classic examples of batter INT (stepping out, ducking to avoid, moving around in the box, "unnatural movement," etc.).
  9. I found Carl's note (Note 275, 2015 BRD §306, p. 198): As you can see, this is hardly authoritative. Yet, it is 100% correct, both in practice and in philosophy, and about both pro and amateur ball.
  10. Pro ball and amateur ball are different games and need to be officiated differently. I seem to recall reading this guidance in the BRD. I apply it in all amateur games, regardless of code.
  11. The feint to 3B complies with the NCAA requirement. After that, he's no longer a pitcher, so the requirement lapses.
  12. maven

    tag plays

    The last appeal would not be granted, because it's not "advantageous." An apparent 4th out appeal is granted only when advantageous, as when the defense appealed R3: that nullified 2 runs. There IS a scenario where all 3 appeals are upheld, but it has to go in order. This assumes that all 3 runners failed to retouch. Defense appeals R1 first. Appeal granted for the 3rd out, R1's run nullified, R2 and R3 score on the time play. Defense next appeals R2. Appeal granted for an apparent 4th out, replacing R1's out, R1 & R2's runs nullified, R3 scores on the time play. Defense finally appeals R3. Appeal granted for an apparent 4th out, replacing R2's out, all 3 runs nullified, no runs score. It would not be correct to say that the half inning has 5 outs. A half inning has only 3 outs, but in this scenario the runner making the 3rd out keeps changing as the appeals are made (and granted). Also, this would never happen. The defense would appeal R3 and be done with it.
  13. maven

    tag plays

    Yes. Unappealed runs scoring ahead of R1 would count. If the defense appealed R1 for an out, and then appealed R3, that appeal would be granted for an apparent 4th out. In fact R3's out would supersede R1's out and become the 3rd out, thus nullifying not only R3's run but also R2's.
  14. If it's legal for a RHP to do it to 1B, then it's legal for a LHP to do it to 3B. The requirements are the same. If a RHP lifts his knee and subsequently picks, that's generally a balk. The requirement is that the step to 1B must be immediate, which is why most RHP will do a jump turn or jab step move to pick. A legal step is possible (and used to be the only way), but it won't involve a knee lift. Just apply the same thinking to a LHP picking to 3B.
  15. maven

    Crazy ending

    By rule, yes to both. The overturned out call put the offense at a disadvantage, and the crew is permitted to remedy that after changing a judgment call. The likelihood either would be done in practice is a function of the guidance umpires receive about applying that provision, and whether that guidance differs for end of game plays. I'd like to say I see a difference between your two examples, but they're both reasonable responses to believing that the game is over.
  16. maven

    Tagging up

    A retouch appeal can never be a force play. So it will always be a time play, and the run counts if scored before the 3rd out.
  17. Regarding question 1, your guess is correct. Record the (half) inning, outs, and situation on your game card and notify the coach that he's received his written warning and that he's restricted to the dugout for the remainder of the game. The rule evolved to include this step in order to differentiate between a verbal warning that has no penalty, and a more serious warning that requires restriction to the dugout. Too often, umpires give verbal warning after verbal warning before (arbitrarily, as it seemed to many coaches) ejecting the coach. The written warning allows coaches to recognize that they've received their last warning. Note that the written warning is NOT a step in a required progression. Coaches who commit an ejectable offense should be ejected immediately, not warned. IIRC, the list of ejectable offenses can be found in rule 3–3–1, toward the end. And my instruction has always been for our umpires to give at most one verbal warning.
  18. Assuming that the plate umpire was working the game behind the plate as usual, the ball should not have been live. The batter hit a dead ball. Nothing happened. Not technically a "do over," because it was never "done" in the first place. There is no penalty. Same ruling all codes. And the umpire should be paying better attention and nip this in the bud.
  19. maven

    Stealing Home

    Regarding (b): the normal standards for batter INT apply. So, the batter is entitled to swing at the pitch as usual—the pitch is ALWAYS for the batter—with all that a swing entails. He is not entitled to leave the box or make "any other movement" besides a swing. If he does these AND his doing so hinders F2's play on the stealing runner, then the batter has committed batter INT. Note that special penalties apply for batter INT with R3 stealing.
  20. Someone around here will say it should have been a balk.
  21. We live in a social media world where everyone gets an "opinion" (Like!), no matter how wrong, unhinged, unhealthy, ill-informed, seditious, or evil. This thread is not the first time that the so-called post-truth era has reared its head on this forum. Unfortunately, nobody has to accept "you're incorrect" any longer: they can simply say, "that's not my reality." For umpiring, we still rely on the "system" to weed out this nonsense, and we promise promotions and threaten lack thereof to those who decline to accept the "realities" of the game. Go back to kiddie ball. But I wonder how long that can last. Yesterday's truth and objective standards are today's bias and prejudice. Cancel the umpire.
  22. That's not quite fair. They think that the provision about pitching motion off the rubber makes this a balk. They should go to some practices and call all those pitchers for balks during warmups.
  23. maven

    Time or No Time

    The "do not pitch" signal is equivalent to calling time. The proper mechanic to make the ball live is pointing at F1 and calling "Play!"
  24. maven

    $500 Fine!

    I've heard that you can buy cards online these days.
  25. The ball remains live after the umpire calls OBS, and it does so precisely for cases such as yours. The rule aims not to give the defense any advantage for their infraction, so runners are allowed to keep running. The penalty is to award bases as needed to nullify the act of OBS. So the umpire must judge where the runner would have reached without the hindrance. In your play, the runner scored, so no award would be indicated to nullify the OBS (how much farther can he go?).
  • Create New...