maven

Good no call. Same ruling in FED (the INT provision for a thrown ball is substantially the same). Here's how I suggest thinking about this play. R1 clearly steps into what he expects to be the throwing lane as F3 fields the batted ball. He surely intends to put himself between F3 and F6 in case there's a throw to 2B. Is that intentional act INT? No—there's no throw yet, or even an attempt to throw. At the time of the runner's choosing his base path, F3 doesn't even have the ball. At any level, it's up to the fielder to "play around" a runner who is running the bases legally. Had R1 deviated afterward—say he saw F6 move "inside" to take a throw—we might have something. Or waving his arms. That's what we should be looking for on these plays. "Setting up" a base path based on where F3 is fielding the ball is nothing.

Below a certain level*, I recommend signaling "safe" and verbalizing "No force out, that run scores!" or the like. As ever, our job is not only to MAKE a ruling, but to communicate it clearly. Saves a LOT of wear and tear, gives the appearance of knowing what's going on, and promotes the good order of that game. Otherwise, and at higher levels, I agree with Jimurray. *To save the followup: "certain level" here is going to include 10U and below (except maybe where they've already been playing for 5 years, year around), rec ball pretty much all the way up, and everything else that is more instructional than competitive. The fact that they tried to make a force out here suggests that these players were still learning the rules, in which case I'm leaning toward communicating the ruling more vigorously and vociferously.

The rule of thumb in baseball is: if either team stops playing due to the umpire's false start, then kill it and reset. Otherwise, play the bounce. In the OP, I'd let the out stand. And then everyone gets a beer. Hey, umpires need beer too.

I agree with Max. Nothing to call here. To realign your intestinal flora, please remember that the key concept of interference is hindrance. Sure, ODB picked up the ball, but there was no play to be hindered, as R3 was not advancing. No hindrance = no INT. Another deflationary thought: ugly or stupid ≠ illegal. BTW, I've had this a few times. I've found that the more vigorously I scold the ODB, the less likely the DC is to come out and demand a penalty. And, when one such coach thought to ask about interference, I merely said, "with what?" For that guy, it was enough, and he went back to the dugout.

This is a tag in all codes except NCAA, which explicitly requires 'voluntary release' for a TAG as well as a CATCH (of a batted ball). In all other codes, secure possession + touch ahead of the runner is sufficient to record a force out or out at 1B on the BR. The OBR reference to "simultaneously or immediately" is supposed to provide a guideline for "secure possession" in the definition of TAG. Secure possession is stipulated in the OP. Thus, it's a TAG.

True, a couple of balks can occur prior to the time of the pitch. Another is dropping the ball. You asked: "Is it true that it's a balk anytime, with runners on, the pitcher fails to pitch properly per definitions in 6-1-1 through 6-1-3?" And those rules dictate legal pitching motions. Your question is ambiguous: "fails to pitch properly" could mean "pitches improperly," which is an illegal pitch and a balk with runners on. It's a balk because the rule says an illegal pitch is a balk. Or the question could mean "never starts the pitch, because F1 violates a rule prior to the time of pitch." It IS possible to violate those rules prior to the time of the pitch. If specified by rule, those are balks because that's the specified penalty. Otherwise, violations are NOT balks ("don't do that"). As ever, there is no shortcut to knowing the rules (and penalties).

The short answer is: yes, an illegal pitch with runners on is a balk, with no runners a ball. But among your examples is just 1 actual pitch (which is a balk). The others, though illegal, are "don't do that." Kill it, tell F1 don't do that, and resume play. If he does it again, it's not a balk (still not an illegal pitch). Instead, it's a failure to comply with the umpire's instruction. The penalty for such failure is ejection. Accordingly, I do stop to ensure F1 and/or his coach know what I'm talking about before proceeding. This usually doesn't take long for HS varsity, but can take proportionately longer depending on the age group.

Thank you, but remember: it's FED. Nobody gets 100%. 🙃

If you want to glean something for a FED game, remember that hurdling a fielder is illegal in FED. BR would be out (live ball) on this play in FED. I try not to call hurdling—hurdling a fielder's arm, for example, is nothing—but the BR seems to go right over F1's head here, and we'd have to get that. In OBR, this is nothing—not hurdling, not OBS, not INT. Good no call.

Well, which is it? If A implies C and B implies C, does it follow that A = B? Not in this universe. Example: all dogs are mammals, and all cats are mammals, but dogs ≠ cats. Another: all 3rd outs at 1B prevent runs, and all 3rd-out force outs prevent runs, but 3rd outs at 1B ≠ 3rd-out force outs. Minimal familiarity with the definition of 'force play' should make it obvious why retiring the BR before he legally touches 1B cannot possibly be a force play, whether or not it's the 3rd out.

As Coach Carl's post implies, the appeal when granted creates a force out at home. How would you have scored it if the batter had hit a come-backer and F1 threw to F2 for the force out? Same here.

No rule code defines a check/half swing. NCAA, I think, has a guideline involving the front plane of the plate, but that's only a guideline. So, the answer is: by rule, a check swing is a strike when it constitutes an offer. That's a judgment call.

No. If he does, it has no impact on a defensive appeal—that is, we would grant an appeal by the defense regardless of the belated touch. Same ruling all codes (though codes vary regarding the "window" for returning to correct a missed touch, a runner who has entered the dugout is done in all codes).

I'm like others so far: situation dependent. I generally will say nothing if I help myself to an extra strike. But I don't mind saying something during the plate appearance if I should have called a pitch a strike, something along the lines of, "Better not take that one again." This lets everyone know that I changed my mind, without quite admitting it was a mistake. A lot of HS catchers will go back and report whatever I said to the coach, so if I don't want to engage the coach I will say nothing.

Why yes, yes he is. Boring meetings and forum sometimes don't mix....Let this be a lesson.

Your inference is incorrect. Batter 6 is (also) batting out of order, and the umpire should rectify the error (without penalty to the offense, due to the timing of the notification).

A batted ball can be fair, foul, or a foul tip. The batter does not have to be holding onto the bat for the entire swing in order for him to have batted the ball. Indeed, the batter need not swing at all to have a batted ball. If the pitch goes toward the batter, who ducks, and the ball hits the bat, we play it as a batted ball (fair or foul, usually not a foul tip in that case).

Yes. But it was a mistake.

File that under "wouldn't that be nice/funny/cool," and never think of it again. Now, coach is responsible for his players' behavior, so if we replace "start with your clean-up hitter" with "start with you," then I have no objection.

That's an NBA rule. In HS and NCAA, the non-scoring team gets possession under their opponent's basket and they may run the end line on the throw in. I don't know Olympic/Int'l hoops rules, but would wager it's not the NBA rule. I expect that noumpere's rationale for the NBA rule is at least part of why NBA is different.

Not arguing, Rich, just a possible explanation for why a sensible mechanic never caught on.

I agree that it makes sense, but only for a single situation: R1 only. Downside? One of the virtues of a set of mechanics is simplicity: having multiple mechanics for BU depending on the number of runners, outs, etc. complicates mechanics. Any set of mechanics is a series of compromises, and this one never caught on (for long) at any level, AFAIK.

Sounds like a question for the league. It's not a baseball game-play rule.

A fielder can tag 1B to retire the BR before he touches the base by holding the ball securely in hand or glove and touching 1B with any part of his body. Some codes explicitly state, and others accept, that "secure possession" will survive contact with the base. When the ball pops out during the tag as a result of the fielder tagging the base, that's not secure possession, and thus no tag. I agree with the umpire's ruling.

Too many of us use this provision to claim that F1's delivery must be the same every time. That's not what the provision means: as noumpere hints at, the rule specifies an additional (FED) constraint on time of pitch, so that F1 cannot pick after starting his delivery with a habitual motion.