Jump to content

maven

Established Member
  • Posts

    9,122
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    335

Everything posted by maven

  1. Yes, the appeal of the BR at 1B would be an advantageous fourth out, because the BR made the out before legally touching 1B. So, by rule, no run would score. No, an advantageous 4th out is available only for outs called on appeal. The BR can never be called out for abandonment prior to touching 1B, which is defined for runners who have touched 1B. However, the defense (at least in some codes) may appeal the BR not touching 1B, which would (as an appeal play) be eligible to be ruled an advantageous 4th out. BTW, it's also possible to have an advantageous 5th out. Just sayin.
  2. Yep, sounds like LL. Probably not a firm, crisp, snap point. The role of the petty bureaucrat was always thus.
  3. Me too, with the same variations in volume as indicated by game situation. The only counterargument to this mechanic points to the pros. I've never worked a pro game.
  4. maven

    Bases loaded

    Hopefully, your umpire will look this up and not make this mistake again.
  5. True, not on the play in the OP. But yes, actual plays can involve do-overs. See lawump's link.
  6. Noumpere should be along shortly to remind you of the 2 (3?) instances in the book that require a do-over... Just can't get away with universal statements here!
  7. No, I was looking for a more specific "unless." We call R3 out for the batter's INT unless there are 2 out. In that case, the B is out: we thus prevent him from coming up to bat the next inning (and R3's run still doesn't score).
  8. Yes, that's INT. The batter's "right to the box" lapses when there is no pitch. If he has time—as he seems to have from the description—he must vacate the space needed by the defense to make the play.
  9. Well, from what I've learned about Einstein-Rosen bridges... Oh, wait, the thread is on travel time, not time travel. Carry on.
  10. maven

    Balk no balk

    When you ask whether this would be "considered as the set position," I'm guessing you mean to ask whether he has come set in this position. That's moot. The problem is that he has his hands together for the sign. That's not legal: by rule, the ball must be in his throwing hand, which must be at his side or behind his back. Failure to do so is not a balk, which is a specific set of violations state in the rules (some umpires call anything weird by F1 a balk). Instead, the umpire should call time, tell F1 "don't do that," and then resume play.
  11. Jimurray can answer for himself, but one way he might respond is: Did the fielder block the runner's path to the base without possession of the ball? YES. Does that act constitute Type A/1 OBS under OBR? MAYBE NOT, because the fielder was in the act of fielding the ball. BUT, IMHO, this action is still OBS, by the book, because the exception for fielding the throw is limited to action required to field the throw. F3 in this play does NOT need to block the base to get to the throw, which is right to him standing at 1B. So I guess I disagree with Lindsay's take that by rule this is not OBS. The required "advanced mechanic" is to keep the runner at 1B rather than imposing the required penalty for this kind of OBS, namely a (mandatory minimum) 1 base award. Note that it doesn't help to say, "Oh, he's just protecting the runner from being pushed off the base" (in this case, by F3's leg). That would still be OBS—what other infraction could it be?
  12. That's not true, Max. If F6 is standing between R1 and the base, R1 may legally slide and initiate contact without violating FPSR (or any other rule). A legal slide is a "get out of FPSR free" card.
  13. I assume you're wondering about FPSR because R1 contacted F6. But the rule requires only that R1 slide legally directly into 2B. If a fielder positions himself between R1 and the base, that's on the fielder. No rule prohibits contact between runner and fielder as such. Provided the slide meets all the conditions of FPSR—and it sounds as if R1 did that in your play—contact is legal.
  14. maven

    Sorting

    There's a reason for that, and it hasn't changed in 6 years.
  15. One of those is incorrect.
  16. If this question was intended for me, I wasn't talking about the announcers.
  17. Agree with Rich. I can't tell from the video whether it's a trap or a catch. If you're a fan, you might be prone to optimism bias, one of 100+ cognitive biases to which Homo sapiens is prone.
  18. maven

    How to score a hit?

    I don't think the OP is asking how to score the play. The question is how to write it in the score book.
  19. maven

    How to score a hit?

    I've never understood why civilians think that umpires keep score.
  20. When we post a borderline play, we should expect responses on both sides. If we also post what we did, some will agree, some will disagree. The tone of the disagreement is another matter, and posters ought to recognize that handling borderline cases is (a) the hardest thing, (b) varies widely in different parts of the country, different levels, and a hundred other variables (see (a) above), and (c) what works for one umpire will produce disastrous results for another (see (a) above). On the other hand: we need a thick skin.
  21. Agree with noumpere. Advanced mechanic: call time before the scored runner touches the ball, once R2 is on 3B. Can't be INT if the ball is dead. And definitely: "Don't do that."
  22. Area of the country could matter: hell, in NJ, their state motto has the F word in it! It's hard to get much traction on this issue when every other YouTube video they watch is chock full of obscenities. For HS kids, it's a routine part of their vocabulary. I tend to distinguish ordinary "kids talking" obscenity from that directed at me/us or an opponent. The latter needs to be addressed, and there's no hard & fast rule about whether EJ is the right way—sometimes it's right for the first offense, sometimes just a KTSO. But I recommend addressing it every time in one way or another.
  23. Assuming runners are on base, this is a balk. Coming set needs to be a single, uninterrupted motion. Not sure which foot you mean or what that has to do with the motion to come set. Once engaged, F1 may do just 3 things: pitch to the batter, step and throw/feint to a base, or disengaged. None of these actions are among those 3; with runners on, this is a balk. "Ever so slightly" anything should never be called in amateur baseball. Life is too short for that. F1 may not "turn his shoulders" to look at a runner, because doing so constitutes a feint. So if F1 does this to 1B, it's a balk for feinting a throw to 1B, not because the shoulder motion itself is illegal. That's why at MOST I would call time and tell F2 to go out and get his F1 not to turn his shoulders. If it's big and obvious, no choice but to call the balk. But "ever so slightly" is ignorable 100% of the time.
×
×
  • Create New...