-
Posts
163 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Everything posted by grozzly
-
Another mishandled ball on the mound = balk!
grozzly replied to Thunderheads's topic in Professional
http://m.mlb.com/video/v36630407/chcmil-renteria-gets-ejected-in-the-8th-inning/?query=balk -
Another mishandled ball on the mound = balk!
grozzly replied to Thunderheads's topic in Professional
Not enough of the pitcher is shown to be sure, but I do NOT have a balk. It's a little bit of a "funky" motion to come set, but I don't see any movement to pitch, and there is a small but discernible pause before the actual pitch. And, of course, as always MLB balks 9or lack thereof) are not the same as what we do. To compare, do you observe a shortest pause on the balk called on Pedro Strop (Cubs) last night? I don't. A balk is a very subjective call... -
Another mishandled ball on the mound = balk!
grozzly replied to Thunderheads's topic in Professional
, and there is a small but discernible pause before the actual pitch. very very discernible...... -
Another mishandled ball on the mound = balk!
grozzly replied to Thunderheads's topic in Professional
By the way, something shocked me yesterday..... Here's the link (sorry, i REALLY don't know how to post a correct link in this topic....) http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/67701318/v36596293/balnyy-two-runs-score-on-jeters-fielders-choice/?query=jeter Don't you think that's a BALK ??? -
Why??? 6.06C, comment: "If a batter strikes at a ball and misses and swings so hard he carries the bat all the way around and, in the umpires judgment, unintentionally hits the catcher or the ball in back of him on the backswing before the catcher has securely held the ball, it shall be called a strike only (not interference). The ball will be dead, however, and no runner shall advance on the play."
-
Possible ????
-
- 21 replies
-
- 1
-
-
I think the "out" call was made very quickly..Don't you think so ?
- 21 replies
-
Very gooooddd.....
-
If i understand your sentence, we must consider that this delineation between safe & out is what we must consider as the beginning & the end of the "umpire responsibility". As far as BC did not pass completely the bag, the umpire must rule the out, and as soon as he has passed entirely the bag, it's a possible apeal play. Right? Very interesting play.
-
I think Maven said that: "the 3rd base is the new 1b base".
-
SS throws glove at thrown ball from right fielder
grozzly replied to mbkcoach's question in Ask the Umpire
OBR: 7.05 Each runner including the batter-runner may, without liability to be put out, advance -- (e) Two bases, if a fielder deliberately throws his glove at and touches a thrown ball. The ball is in play; Rules 7.05(b) through 7.05(e) Comment: In applying (b-c-d-e) the umpire must rule that the thrown glove or detached cap or mask has touched the ball. There is no penalty if the ball is not touched. That's clear... if the fielder doesn't touch the ball, that's nothing. -
it seems you have an out... in FED, i don't know, but in OBR, a collision between BR and catcher in this kind of situation isn't an OBS, except if BR interfers with the catcher deliberatly.
-
this would be BI if the batter blocks the catcher trying to tag out R3, but not in this situation....
-
-
same rule for a pickoff at first, no ? Throw to 3rd baseman too far from the bag...
-
Thank you Maven !! i was wondering why Machado was out for interference...
-
Are you sure she was talking about the indicator ?
-
why isn't it clearer in OBR?
-
It seems that this debate goes on and on....I had this case in my French league last week. The umpire called a balk... It is written nowhere that taking signs from the catcher is a balk if F1 doesn't make contact with the rubber, no? It's a balk if it generates a fastpicth for example.
-
actually, it's nearly unnecessary to call INT in this case. If F6 drops the ball, BR is out, as if F6 would have catched the ball...in the case of an IFF, If R2 voluntary & delibarately interfers with F6, and prevents him from catching the ball, can you retire both the runner and BR?
