UmpJM

zoops, Are you saying you didn't watch the FED rules video this year, nor read the clarifying interpretation on the FED website? I found it uncharacteristically clear and sensible. JM

catsbacker, If you give a mouse a cookie..... JM

What rule is the coach suggesting is being misapplied? (He has to have one, or you can dismiss his protest.) It's the only one you need to address. (Though you might "cite" OTHER rules in supporting your ultimate adjudication of the protest.) If his "beef" is that the umpire judged the ball "lodged" when it went behind the tarp, he is NOT arguing a rule. He is in disagreement with the umpire's judgment. Which is his right, but it's not protestable.The rules which mention specific types of "lodging" (screen, fence, umpire equipment, etc) do not provide an exhaustive enumerative list. They are (common) examples of how balls become "lodged" during a baseball game. There are other ways balls can become lodged during a baseball game that are NOT explicitly and specifically mentioned in the rules. Like rolling behind a tarp, for example. If this was not covered during the ground rules (which it probably ought have been) the umpire decides how to deal with it. The coach has a legitimate beef if it wasn't covered at the plate conference, but it is not a protestable beef. See what rule he thinks was misapplied. I've been blindsided before when the coach had a completely DIFFERENT issue than the issue I thought he had. You may feel free to "ping me" here when you get the protest if you would like my perspective. JM

^What grayhawk said. JM

Trail foot completely beyond the bag. JM

No brainer. Umpire judged ball was lodged. Two bases. Protest denied. JM

bam, At the time I was a coach (Daddy ball.) About a year later I started umpiring. Lala, The J/R is an instruction manual. The BRD is a reference manual. Concur with noumpere's comments regarding opinion & error. And respect. JM

Good answer. "Completed hit turn at bat" would be more correct. JM

Of course "C" is correct. Hard to imagine a more poorly worded question if your goal was to gauge an umpire's understanding of the BOOT rule. On the other hand, it was brilliant in terms of developing our "answering bad questions" skills. WTF do they mean "again". Has B3 even BATTED yet? How would you know? 12:41. (Including the time to create this topic.) Book checks - 1. ("Intentionally" pitching close to the batter. I knew what it said, but I wanted to read the actual words to answer the question.) 100% Glad I don't have to waste that time again until next year. JM P.S. Watched the "rules video" prior to taking the test and after watching the NCAA basketball championship. Anyone else hear a "gross error" in the section on backswing interference? (FWIW, I believe the rule clarification is excellent.)

The batting order is B3, B4, B5, and B6. B5 erroneously bats in place of B3. The error is discovered by the defensive coach and called to the umpire's attention prior to the first pitch to the next batter. A. The next proper hitter is B6. B. B5 is declared out. C. B3 may not legally bat again until his turn comes up as listed in the batting order. D. Any run scored or advancement of runners as a result of B5's actions at bat will stand. JM

bam, You misconstrue. I LOVE the BRD. In particular, one of the copies I have which Carl personally inscribed when I had the opportunity to have lunch with him and a young protege of his when I was travelling on business in Texas. I just don't think it's a good "first learning" resource. Now, I probably refer to it more than any of my other interp manuals. IMHO, EVERY umpire should have at least one. JM

bam, Stop it. You're killing me, man. Lala, The most valuable skill I have developed from taking FED tests is that I believe I've gotten better at answering bad questions. Which, when you think about it, is a pretty important skill for those of us who do this. (Who knew?) Maybe they're a lot smarter than we give them credit for. As to "differences", I find bam's advice "spot on". You might also want to acquire a J/R "Rules Differences" edition. JM

^ What Lala said.... JM

jhcoach, No, it is not. Have the coach put them in the dugout. 3-3-1a. 3.3.1U Edited to add.... jh, Just noticed that you had posted this in the "Collegiate" section. (I always just browse using the "new content" button. The answer is (mostly) the same, but the cites are different. NCAA 5-2-f & 5-4-d. As you suggest, this would be LEGAL (in NCAA) were the players not in uniform. JM

bam, In all seriousness, you make a good point. I was taking a "calculated risk", and my decision to do as I did was influenced by the fact that I've worked a number of games for this coach over the last few years, and on the handful of occasions when he's come out to talk to the umpire, he has always had a "legitimate" question or issue and conducted himself like a gentleman. This was also a JV non-con game and was not the least bit "heated". But even if my previous experience had indicated he had a tendency towards jerkiness and this was some crucial big conference game, I'm still going to answer his question. I mean, if he asks me something like "Why do you keep screwing us with your calls?" or something like that, it's going to be a much different conversation. Anyway, I think you make a good point, and I'm glad you raised it. JM

James, I pretty much concur with the comments above. I'll just add you seem to have "impartial and firm" down pretty well. Perhaps a little work on "courteous" is in order. Edited to add.... I had a coach ask me in a game last weekend (HS JV) between innings why I hadn't called a balk when his opponent's F1 had thrown a pick-off directly to 1B while the F3 was nowhere near the bag. Now he was being a perfect gentleman about it, so I explained that as long as the throw goes to the bag, he's fine. I allowed that if he had thrown to the F3 that far off the bag, I would have called a balk. He then said, but if the fielder isn't covering, isn't that throwing to an unoccupied base? I'll admit, I did not see that one coming. I said, no, technically speaking, only runners can "occupy' a base. I thought it would take too long to clear up the confusion, so I suggested I would be happy to follow up with him after the game. He was fine with that & returned to his dugout & the game continued. I looked for him after I'd changed after the game, but they were the visitors and had made a quick exit. That evening, I sent him a follow-up e-mail in which I allowed how that was an easy thing to get confused about, because there is nothing in the text of the FED Rule or Case book that clearly describes that specific situation. (There isn't.) Then I explained a carefully as I could how situations where fielders are not near the bag when a pick-off occurs are properly ruled, and supplied him with a MLBUM cite that said pretty much exactly what I had told him on the field. ("...However, there is no violation if the pitcher throws the ball directly to first base in this situation. ..") I also gave him a brief explanation of what "occupying a base" meant and the attendant balk proscription. I closed by thanking him for his professional demeanor in bringing his question to me and wishing him luck with the rest of his season. A couple of hours later, I get an e-mail thanking me for following up and he's calling me names like "thoughtful" and "professional" says he loved that I was willing to follow-up after the game, thought I did a "great job" (it was a V/JV Dh - I had the V plate & the JV bases) and he hopes they get me again later in the season. And my assigner is copied on the note. So, I show the coach the simple courtesy of attempting to answer his reasonable question between innings, then following up when time ran short. You end up dumping an AC in a freakin' 9U game because you wouldn't give the coach the time of day. My assigner gets an e-mail from a delighted client calling one of his umpires thoughtful and professional, and that his umpire did "a great job". Your assigner gets an ejection report and an impression you don't have the game management skills to deal with a 9U game. Which would you rather have? JM

LRZ, None that I can think of. JM

Cricket, I don't believe either Evans or Wendelstedt makes ANY recommendation on the question with regard to non-professional games. It's more a "custom and practice" thing. At the professional level, the custom and practice is that the manager is supposed to know, and ask if he would prefer the result rather than the penalty. The BRD and J/R recommendations to offer the choice seem eminently sensible to me. Are you aware of another "authority" that makes a contrary recommendation? Me neither. My "custom and practice" is to offer when there's a meaningful choice. If you choose not to, you're certainly not violating any rule, but you might very well be setting yourself up for a game management situation. JM

dhutton, Your ruling was correct, and your explanation was "spot on". However, you will not find ANYTHING in the text of the OBR rules that says anything like "...unless he has the opportunity to clear the area and fails to do so..." because it's not there. It is, however, how the rule is properly enforced. For that, you need an interpretation manual. Like J/R for example: It then goes on to say that in that situation, if he has the opportunity, the batter must make a reasonable effort to vacate any area the defense needs to make a play. JM

Matt, You're right. That is an even more egregious miscarriage of justice. I feel your pain, buddy. JM

@maven, Appreciate the "shout out". For those who didn't see it: http://umpire-empire.com/index.php/topic/56588-what-is-considered-a-play/ I still can't believe I didn't get a "best answer" gold star for that one. Sheesh, what's a guy gotta do? Do you think it was because of the lame Zoolander reference I followed up with? JM

ricka, You SHOULD, in fact, have one. Ours includes things like you never mention specific schools, coaches, or players when talking about situations on any social media that is in any sense "public". (Umpire judgment. You are expected to use good judgment.) If you want to talk about a situation you had "anonymously" (not you so much as the participants), that's fine. Participating in social media to improve your umpiring is actively encouraged. One of our board members just started holding weekly "web conferences" using the "free" version of "anymeeting". It's great. Guys submit topics during the week. One of the guy sputs together an agenda and "moderates". You can do slides, YouTube videos, webcams. All voluntary. We get like 20-30 people a week. Guys bring up things that happened at their recent games and we kick it around. I think it's a pretty good thing. (I really, really like my association.) JM

My opinion, supported by both the BRD and J/R, is to offer the coach the choice (if there is a meaningful choice) at all non-professional levels. Even at the college level. That's what I'd do. JM P.S. Cricket, I do not think the BRD means what you think it means...... Did you read the "note" at the end of the section? If you did, read it again. Also, Carl mis-characterizes the J/R position on the question. You would have to read #3 in the "All Amateur Codes" Appendix of the J/R to know that. JM

What level? JM

Since R3 was "attempting to advance" on the pitch, he keeps 3B if the coach chooses the penalty. Do you offer the choice, or does the coach have to ask? JM