ricka56

If a batter can't stop swinging (forward) before the pitch arrives, i'm probably getting a strike.

Perhaps that's how he survived the Jonestown massacre...haw

These can be knotty situations. I think he was trying to pick a fight....sometimes they are unavoidable. It was good that you didn't debate the previous plays, that would have been playing right into his hands. Sometimes coach will claim that he's not arguing he just asking a question. In your case the premise of his question is faulty, so I wouldn't entertain that kind of question and would instead attempt to shut him down. Sometimes its not what we say, but how we say it. And I don't have a good system for how you should say something versus HOW YOU SAY SOMETHING. The text book probably says (though I may have skipped this chapter) to remain calm, but cut off this kind of discussion ASAP. But when the coach is trying to get under your skin, that is easier said than done.

I think that this is calls for a 8.01c ruling. You become god and decide what would have happened.

OBR 6.01a penalty : ... In the event the batter-runner has not reached first base, all runners shall return to the base last occupied at the time of the pitch;

If F2 had secure possession, then the throw is history (wrt the base award). So award is from time the ball came out of F2's mitt.

I think that the intent to deceive tie-breaker is a crutch, There are no ties, either its legal or it ain't.

Goes without saying.

Oh, I didn't realize that you were there.

The runner can't go out of his way to try and draw an obstruction call. No sale.

I cringe when my partner invokes that part of the rule. That is what it says, but you follow that suggestion, you'd be calling a lot of balks. And potentially turning your games to crap.

Not if your partner is wearing navy. If you and your partner match, then have at it. (if your league/assn doesn't object).

If the fielder has to take two or more steps to reach the ball, that is more than the step and reach and then he's liable to be called for obstruction. Your play ? HTBT One of the hardest things for an umpire to do is put plays that you are unsure of out your head for the remainder of the game. There will be plenty of time talk about the weird play after the game. If you can't get that play out of your head, you are likely to miss something else...flush it. Easier said than done, but it needs to be done.

At a distance, we can discern in 2-dimensions (left/right/up/down). From 1B/3B it looks like F1's body moves towards HP. From HP/2B it looks like his body moves towards 1B. When F1 is near the acceptable 45 degree boundary, I can't see making a balk call.

Last night's partner told me he had a drone flying over the field during his game (reachable with a flyball). If a batted ball hit an unauthorized drone, how would you rule if the can of corn flyball dropped in fair territory uncaught ?

Retouching HP before returning to 3B is required. If he didn't retouch HP, a retouch appeal can be applied by the defense. The defense can appeal if they get the throw to 3B before the runner gets back there. Once he retouches 3B he has no longer left early as noumpere pointed out.

If the defense readily found the ball (and the offense saw where it went), no one is disadvantaged. I see no need to over-officiate this situation and keep the ball live.

Jab step or ump turn, whatever you call it, don't call it a legal disengagement. PU and U2 can see it, need to call it. For BU (2-man), its tougher to see the pivot foot slide towards 3B. PU needs to get this.

You don't put a ball in play if you know that it has been altered.

STFU, and swing the bat. (if he is still at bat) STFU, and get back to the dugout. (if I just rung him up) ... The lost art of talking to a 12 y.o. whiner.

If you are dealing with daddy coaches, many don't understand the message that burning the dugout is suppose to send. So it might not have much effect. If it has no effect, then it is your job to learn them by forcefully/unequivocally warning them and ejecting them if they continue to be an arse.

I love that a pitcher can't argue this kind of ejection because that would defeat the purpose of his true intent.

As you might realize, I would not allow anyone to call me a cheat and stay in the ballgame. If you can not defend your integrity, then you can not control a game. I am not trying to discourage an umpire willing to learn, but if the prospect of defending your integrity is too intimidating, then it may be time to find another hobby. If you can look them straight in the eye and demand a retraction of their cheating accusation you might gain their respect. But if you are up against people that cry racism every time the paperboy is late delivering their newspaper, then you might want to find another place to work.

Fair enough. "That's enough" is sufficient warning. But some coaches are (or act) flabbergasted when they are ejected after getting personal (or too persistent). They complain, "why was I ejected". They are clueless. If I tell them what's going to happen if they don't stop their misbehavior, I've already answered the why question. Then the decision whether he stays or goes is all his. I don't always handle the problem child in this manner. It's just one of my game management tools.

The profanity limit is dependent on the level that you are doing. The younger the player, the less tolerance, but F-bombs are EJs in everything that I do (up to HS). The key to determining if a coach is getting personal, is his use of the pronoun you. You're horrible, you don't know what you're doing, you blew it, etc. I don't eject on the first occurance of "you blah blah blah" (unless it something like "you suck") but I will tell him to knock it off and may specify the warning, "if you don't knock it off and get back to the dugout, you will be ejected". Some coaches will try to bait you and accuse you of threatening him with ejection. "No, coach, I am letting you know what is going to happen if you continue to misbehave."