Jump to content

maven

Established Member
  • Posts

    9,399
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    362

Everything posted by maven

  1. Correct: using the CR in that situation costs the coach his sub (B10) AND F1's re-entry. Since you did all that, it is legal. F1 is the pitcher for the CR rule if he was pitcher when the previous half inning ended.
  2. Here's the rule: Note the phrase, "as he is attempting to score." In the video, it seems to me that because the ball arrives before the runner, F2 has not violated the rule.
  3. maven

    Rattle in the Bat

    Oooh, good one. Want to join my football crew and not throw a bunch of flags this fall?
  4. Like a fielder lining up in foul territory, ignore it until someone complains, then enforce it equally both ways.
  5. If he moves his hands before having disengaged, it is a start/stop balk, not a balk for making a motion naturally associated with his pitch.
  6. maven

    Rattle in the Bat

    The missing info from the situation is whether the bat contacted the ball during the batter's time at bat (say, on a foul ball). If so, then I'd employ the exception and rule that the bat became illegal during the at bat. Remove the bat from play and play on. Otherwise, it sounds like he came to the plate with an illegal bat and should be penalized accordingly.
  7. You don't mention a ruleset, but I know of no prohibition that would affect this. Kinda annoying to have to wait for F4 to put on the gear...
  8. Well, we might, but as I'm thinking about the play, I wouldn't. First, nothing in the rules dictates how F1 must step off the rubber, other than "step backward off the pitcher's plate with his pivot foot first." In particular, nothing prohibits turning his foot as he does so. I disagree with Steve about the legality of that part of it. Second, I don't regard the leg swing toward 2B as a "movement naturally associated with his pitch," generally speaking. It's going the wrong direction, for one thing, which would make it quite unnatural. (FED 6-2-5) Third, a properly coached runner will never see the front leg move. Once the pivot moves back, he's headed back to the base. So I do not see that part of the move as violating the spirit of the balk rule, which aims to prohibit illegal deception. So, again, as I am picturing this, I'm with @JHSump and allowing it. If I saw video of it, I might have to change my mind, and acknowledge that in the meantime there's room for intelligent umpires to disagree, perhaps rooted in different mental images of the move.
  9. You have to judge whether the disengagement is legal. If so, he's an infielder and the pitching restrictions are off. Nothing else he does can make him liable for a balk. No rule specifies how he must step off, other than that the pivot foot alone must move first, the foot must go directly back behind the rubber, and the foot needs to be on the ground before his hands separate (usually in the set). It sounds as if he met those conditions.
  10. maven

    Backswing INT

    Well I don't get all the big words you use sometimes . By the way, I agree with you... Sent using Tapatalk All at the same low price, my friend!
  11. No. DH is defined in 3-1-4. The EH does not appear.
  12. That's not INT, and the EJ will be enforced at the end of playing action. Allow play to continue. The ball is live (coach cannot call time, only request it), and the defense has the opportunity to record further outs. HS varsity, I'm not killing it because coach is shouting. The defense should know that the ball is live and play on the BR.
  13. I would not extend that ruling to any member of the offense. The coach may be on the field, but has no business in fair territory. That's why it is interference if he is hit there. A retired runner may be in fair territory, so that "automatic interference" thingy (what is that?) would not apply. Moreover, from the OP it sounds as if the retired BR was trying to stay out of fair territory, in order to avoid interfering. OBR 7.11 requires vacating space needed by a fielder. It's about staying out of a fielder's way. Don't read the second or third sentences in isolation from the first. If you're 50 feet from a fielder, this provision is not going to apply. The only way I'm calling INT here is if the retired runner does something intentionally to interfere: if he deliberately fails to get out of the way, for example. And it's going to have to be pretty obvious. The throw from RF to the plate should be going to the cutoff, well in fair territory. If it hits the retired BR in foul territory, I'm not bailing out the defense's lack of throwing skills with a bogus INT call.
  14. If it's a FED game, you could also try, "he permitted the pitch to hit him," which is the language in the rule (not "make an attempt" to avoid or whatever). Permitting the pitch to hit one is an intentional act, and so you're judging intent. I have no problem with that (we judge each others' intentions all the time, every day, when we decide whether something is said sincerely, in jest, sarcastically, ironically, or whathaveyou). So for me it depends on the pitch and the batter's actions. Fastballs sometimes don't leave you much time to move. Curve balls do, but they sometimes break out of the way. And sometimes a batter just freezes, which for me does not constitute permitting the pitch to hit him. I don't have a simple algorithm to share for this call. I will say, any benefit of the doubt goes to the batter. Unless I am confident that he permitted the ball to hit him, he's on his way to 1B.
  15. maven

    Backswing INT

    I don't get all the high dudgeon folks get into about FED. If you don't like the rules, don't work the games. If you want to work the games, you have to apply the rules — b1tching about them won't make them any easier to learn or apply, just aggravate your heart condition (and annoy your peers).
  16. The top was a little soft in my first plate this season, too. Though, to be fair (to myself), the game did start at 10:15pm, which is around my bedtime.
  17. Why would it even cross anyone's mind that this was some kind of rule violation? Coach lost his mind. Nothing to cross.
  18. HS varsity and up: this ruling is definitely supportable. Subvarsity and down: I'd recommend a warning in lieu of an EJ for a first offense. If it's an ABS EJ, then I could support that, too.
  19. I think @noumpere's point was the same as mine: since you'd have to get an out, you should NOT rule verbal INT on this play.
  20. The first part (getting coach's attention) is OK, could be a little confrontational depending on delivery. I try to avoid telling coaches what to do (or what they need). I put "I'll be happy to answer your question" first, because it prioritizes what coach wants, which is to have his say. FIRST, he hears that he will get to have his say, THEN he hears that he has to behave. In behavior modification, this order is important.
  21. Verbal Interference - FED 2.21.1.A Offensive interference is an act (physical or verbal) by the team at bat: a. which interferes, obstructs, impedes or confuses any fielder attempting to make a play.... You could dump the coach under 3.3.1.g.4. It might be a stretch. Anytime a pitcher makes a move on the mound people scream "Balk!", so it may be tough to say he did it to intentionally confuse. If you rule this verbal INT, you have to call someone out. Who will that be? I would not rule this verbal INT. The offense is trying to get a cheap run by doing one of 3 things: make the pitcher balk, fool the umpire into calling a balk, or run their double steal play. You can thwart all 3 by calling time, putting the runners back, and warning the coach that the next outburst will result in his ejection. I will also say that, if the coach's shout had caused F1 to balk, you should kill it, ignore the balk, and reset.
  22. You might be asking one of two questions: how high should I be calling it? how can I call the high strike more consistently? Regarding (1), that will depend on the level, of course. But in another sense, it doesn't matter much: if you're not too goofy and you're giving the same pitch both ways, the batters will adjust. For (2), which is more crucial, I agree w/ @Mike Prince. Settle your mechanics, let the pitch come to you, and your consistency will improve.
  23. In a respectful tone: "Coach, if you have a question, I'll be happy to answer it. But I'm not listening to that." Don't permit coaches to rant and rave. It sets a bad example for the kids, the other daddy-coaches, and everyone else. They sometimes (though less and less) see it in the pro game and infer that it's appropriate at every level. It is not. If he can't settle down, he can rant to his steering wheel. We need not listen to it.
  24. Bases loaded, 2 outs, ground ball to F6 in the hole, F3 falls down catching the throw. BU not sure what to call. Ole timey partner (BU): "Whatcha got?" Me: "The plate!"
  25. Agree with @Matt. Your reference to 'she' makes me think this might be softball, about which I know almost nothing. The baseball rule requires the batter to vacate the area needed by the defense, so as not to hinder the play. It sounds as if this batter did exactly that: crossing the plate is irrelevant. No hindrance = no INT, at least for baseball.
×
×
  • Create New...