ricka56

If I had finished the second sentence of the 5.06(a)(4)(G) comment, it might have answered your question. If the batter-runner has not reached first base, the award is two bases at the time the pitch was made for all runners.

And then PU and U3 share a look that says U1's buying tonight.

Yeah, but only one has taken the risk of opining about where BR ends up. The inexperienced fisherman's gonna need to dig for his bait. 5.06(a)(4)(G) comments The position of the batter-runner at the time the wild throw left the thrower’s hand is the key in deciding the award of bases. If the batter-runner has not reached first base, the award is two bases at the time the pitch. Interesting that there is an exception to the TOP award when F2 throws to DBT trying to retire R3 scoring (nearly the OP), but that exception only applies when B is not a BR.

That was a rhetorical (joke) question

Don't remember everything said. "two, two" was one think F4 was saying along with miming DP actions. R1 was confused. Stopped, restarted towards 2B on the antics before sprinting/diving back to 1B. If delaying his return because of the antics is deemed obstruction, then I missed it. Also, props to Mr. Blue for the appropriate interp , but the official Hopkins interp and the BRD entry are not consistent. Is one of them trying to deke us ?

I had this last night. R1 stealing, less than 2 outs. Batter hits a towering fly ball. F6 will catch it when it returns to earth, but before then F4 starts acting and talking like he has gloved a ground ball and wants to turn two. F6 doesn't go near 2B (he has a fly ball to catch) but fakes towards 2B, talking and trying to add to R1's confusion (who has no idea which way to go). R1 stops, then continues towards 2B (because of F4/F6 antics) before realizing that he needs to return to 1B (which he does without a throw). If R1 was doubled up at 1B, would this be verbal obstruction (award 2B) ? If R1 returned safely to 1B (as was the case), is this still a 2B award ?

Too late to get assigned as your partner?!? .... drat

DHC: Blue, they have too many players swinging bats while my pitcher is warming up. Me: Coach, you have a full plate coaching your team. I suggest that you go tend to them. If worrying about frivolous law suits is a "real" concern, there is insurance available to cover your TWP fears.

Of course this would never happen to me, but I would advise the umpire that let this happen to take both out...and the verbal beating from the OHC.

A fielder (F1/F3) making a play on a runner (R1) is an exception to the batter staying in the batter's box rule. When the batter is out of the box (as permitted), F1 can not legally deliver a pitch. It is the offense's responsibility (batter) to step out of the box to give R1 time to get up and get ready to be a base runner before re-entering the bb...It is not the umpire's responsibility. That said, this kind of "bush league" tactic is run by douche bag coaches trying to get an advantage over lesser coached players. I doubt that the baseball gods would smite an umpire for over-officiousness in this instance. TIME ... that's not cricket.

I have seen a marked improvement in calling BI. In my neck-of-the-woods higher level umpires don't miss this and I think it has trickled down considerably. But, agree that there is much room for improvement... ...I doubt players will ever learn.

This is the rule book definition of a force play: A FORCE PLAY is a play in which a runner legally loses his right to occupy a base by reason of the batter becoming a runner. Nothing in the situation that you describe has anything to do with this rule. The trailing runner is out only if tagged before touching 2B.

~sigh~ Afraid its gonna be a long Texas Rangers season

You're right, my mistake. If R2 ran all the way to the hole to brush F6, then he gets what he gets.

That's a call your partner makes when the game takes a sharp turn towards Guanoville.

I think 'A' is the answer...maybe with a OOO obstruction call on F5, in addition. The way I see this, when F6 is about to make the play, F5 has no protection and must not obstruct R2. The inadvertently brush might be obstruction, but you probably wouldn't protect R2 past 3B, which is where he ended up.

Imagination has no bounds in the TW.

It might be running lane interference if the batter/runner was running in fair territory and the throw was coming from around home plate. In high school rules, the quality of the throw doesn't matter. In official baseball rules, the throw would have to be good enough to have gotten the runner out for interference.

I think that by "last time by" standard (which I believe that Fed adheres to), if the runner retouched 1B and properly touched 2B on obstruction awarded bases, then there is no longer a missed base appeal available.

I don't understand the advantage of this positioning. R3 is the priority and 'C' is the best place to be. And BU should be able to get to a good position on ground balls that are going to be played to 1B. I don't understand the advantage of 'B' in this sitch.

An argument for/against a balk call in the youtube video pickoff can be made. Not for the leg raised as much for the immediate body direction (towards HP). I know I don't have a balk with me in 'B' on a 2-man crew...90% sure no balk as PU either. The OP issue about LHP raising his non-pivot foot and balancing (hanging there) is a balk for not delivering without hesitation. But that's not what was in the you tube video.

No HS HC wants a ball penalty called when on defense. In this neck-of-the-woods, nearly all understand that they shouldn't expect that penalty called when they are on offense. I think that the HS umpire that calls this is risking having BOTH HC eye the crew with suspicion (what's next?). And worse would be if the HC umpire gives a penalty after being confronted by the OHC. I'd rather not penalize and shutdown douche-bag OHC that wants it both ways.

I could sell that to HC...along with telling him that middle infielder is on thin ice trying to steer us to turdville.

Batted ball strikes the BR in fair territory...if BI is not the correct term, mea culpa.