goody14

Makes sense. The broader question is "does a walk forcing in a run constitute an ordinary play" or is it is something special because it is an award. Seems like we use the same thinking no matter walk or hit.

Pretty sure I am overthinking this. 9U, OBR ruleset (don't think it would matter). Bases loaded, 2 outs. Batter receives ball 4. Runner from 3rd misses home plate. Pitcher gets ball back and time is never called. Defensive coaches tell pitcher to run over and tag R3. He does so before the runner gets to the dugout. We have an out here right. But, it did bring to mind an interesting secondary question for me: At what point is the runner from 3rd in jeopardy of being called out on appeal? Is it as soon as he is one step past home plate without touching it? Do we use the same criteria as a normal play at home - if he is around the plate, then he has to be tagged but once a distance away, the base can be tagged on the appeal.

Last play of the top of the 8th in the Cubs/Mariners game. It involved a back throw, bad baserunning, a time play, one upheld review and one review not allowed...

August 13 Cardinals/Royals 7th Inning No OutsBases LoadedRandy Arozarena Batter hits ball past a diving shortstop. Ball hits Molina in back of the dive. Umpires kill play. According to the MLB recaps, Molina was not called out (which seems reasonable since it passed directly through or by a fielder - certainly within a dive...since he actually dove). Of course, if Molina is not out, I cannot figure out why the play was killed. If you listen to audio, you can hear someone say "it was behind him, my fault". Maybe this was the umpire stating it should not have been killed. Or possibly, the umpires never killed it and the announcers mistakenly said dead ball. Regardless, heck of a way to get your first major league hit.

Shoot - not only do baserunners need to know, but partners need to know as well. I had a very, very bad situation last weekend where my partner paused for 1-2 beats on a liner to the pitcher (I was in C - outside diamond with view of pitcher's back) before performing a mechanic that was somewhere between a convulsion and Elaine's dance from Seinfeld. I interpreted this as an out call and called rest of play accordingly. When later asked, partner said ball hit ground. We then had to try and figure out how to solve for placement of batters and runners. Defense was not very happy (rightfully). It was no fun all the way around.

Fair enough. I will stop trying to read something that is not there.

Man - if we uphold (b) with no exceptions (I think this is what you are trying to get across), then that is one honey of a penalty for leaving early. Of course (b) says if the batter reaches first safely. In my example he would have reached second safely. I suppose I was wondering if there are a further interpretation to cover the ball out of play. But you are right, without that, it is a ball in the infield and no runner can score. I don't see clause (b) being an exact match.

This is my first year working Babe Ruth/Cal Ripken with the special 60ft running rules. I understand that when the bases are loaded if a runner leaves early no run can score when the ball stays in the infield (if the batter reaches, we remove the runner on 3rd with no out and no run). But, what is the shortstop throws the ball out of play. If I were on a field, I would rationalize that the error means the batter gets more than one base - so the runners would as well (basically they can go as far as the batter much like a ball hit to the OF). I would put batter on second, R1 to 3rd and score two runs. Is this right?

The 2019 Babe Ruth Book is pretty much a copy and paste of old OBR (before they changed the numbering and format). As such, there is no bona fide slide section. But, they still have the 6.05(m) which says any runner is out if the preceding runner intentionally interferes with a fielder attempting to throw a ball to complete the play. I would use the provisions of the new bona fide slide rule to gauge whether there was interference in this case. Not sure if this is black letter correct, but it not too much of a stretch.

There is an extra clause in FED (8-3-5): I am not sure if he actually has to be running backwards or it is assumed once ball is caught he is a runner returning. If he is between 2nd and 3rd and returning to first, then his award would be 3rd - as I read the above. But, as you said, FED also dictates you can not be beyond the base missed or re-touched at the moment the ball becomes dead. So he would be subject to appeal.

This is how I handled it. I made the coach give the ball to the kid, called play, and he threw it to first (without throwing it out of play again thankfully)

Surely this is not the first time this has happened, but first time I have seen it. I was the umpire for this play! Kevin did a great job of describing the play. Good to get confirmation on the original call. This was Babe Ruth/Cal Ripken which is modified OBR. Now let's talk about the final part. In my conversation with the defensive coach he wanted an immediate out for not tagging up. I told him that the award was home, but if he thinks there was a violation he has ways to address this. He then asked if he can appeal, I said he could. This was coach pitch so before play resumed the pitcher did not have the ball. Since he had indicated to me earlier he wanted to appeal, this is when I "asked" him if he wanted to do that. He said yes so I had the coach give the ball to the player for the appeal. I honestly don't know how coach pitch leagues/tourneys handle appeals. I am thinking we should re-write our house rules to be dead ball appeals (even with OBR rules) at this level otherwise appeals are goofy with a coach pitcher Happy to get feedback on if my conversation with the defensive coach was correct.

Not sure if this will work, but I saw this on Twitter. https://twitter.com/i/status/1031076855984447488 R1 and the first base coach saw it, pointed, and U1 grabbed it. There must have been something from that angle.

I was curious about the potential protest angle when I started the OP. Given he killed the ball and as stated by others rule 10 does not cover this instance, I am not sure the IHSAA could do anything. They have since come out and said the rule was misapplied. I found it curious he did not go for help and no other umpire came in to offer anything. If a rule is misapplied, I think I go and chat with the other guy - especially in a semi-state game. Not sure if that is a best practice or not. Tough situation all around.

Start at about the 48:00 mark. R2, R3 with 2 outs. Batter clips catcher's glove on swing but still serves ball into center field. Home plate umpire kills the play immediately and places batter at 1B keeping R2 and R3 in place. As all runners would have gotten a base, including B/R, the interference should have been disregarded. Can the umpire do anything to correct the misapplication of the rule? Also, what would you if you were a field umpire?

Nice pull @Senor Azul Thanks gentlemen for the quick responses.

Rules are very clear that a head coach that does not attend the pregame conference is restricted to the dugout. Since he is not ejected, he is still the person that we communicate with and more importantly who communicates with us during the game, right? I have seen some folks apply this logic "well, the head coach is restricted so the only one who can discuss a call with us is the one that attended the conference". I don't see rulebook support for this. Am I thinking about this right?

Am I right in saying that MLB and NFHS are now aligned on when to call the rule (enforcement is different since batter is out in high school and not in MLB for "weak" interference on a steal). The bat hitting the catcher is in and of itself enough to call the INT.

Joe Torre has accepted your challenge.

Had someone in my association call me with this one. College fall ball (but I think it would be the same in all codes). R3 0 outs. Fly ball to LF. Runner leaves early as seen by the PU. Throw goes to the catcher. R3 gets part way home and retreats back to third. Catcher throws the ball to F5 who is standing on the base. The ball clearly beats runner back. F5 attempts to apply a tag and misses. Umpire in the middle (who has no responsibility in watching the tag) rules the runner safe on the missed tag. Argument for out: The ball beat him back to third. F5 does not have to state he is appealing since the nature of this play is by itself an appeal. If this is the case, the plate guy would grab it. Argument for safe: F5 did not necessarily know the guy left early. His attempt to put down a tag means he was not appealing a missed base. The act of touching a base by itself is not an appeal. I think I have an out, but I would not bet @maven 's mortgage on it. So what do you have from a rule and also a mechanic perspective?

I originally thought the umps on the field got it right. In looking at my PBUC Manual, I am not so sure anymore. Here is section 7.14 from the 2014 edition:

Had this question come to me and not sure of the answer. Hoping this is not one of the weird differences in FED. Batter bunts ball and drops bat. Bat is half in fair territory and half in foul. Ball rolls back and hits part of the bat that is in fair territory. It subsequently rolls into foul territory and stops. I have a foul ball - and I assumed this was the same in all codes. Someone brought to my attention FED rule 2-5-1f (emphasis is mine) That makes it sound like the situation above could result in a fair ball. But, then case play 2.5.1 E comes in: Ruling c has a foul ball but it has bat hitting ball and not ball hitting bat. I am inclined to apply the case ruling and keep my original play as a foul ball. What do you think FED was going for when putting the word equipment in the definition...it is not there in OBR.

Ahhh....the clip played both feeds. The second one is most definitely Vin. Thanks

Don't think that is Vin Scully. The feed says it is from FS San Diego. I think it is Dick Enberg.

This popped up on my association's FB page today and I thought it was interesting. Please take the situation for what it is - yes, we all know that preventative umpiring could have stopped the whole thing. Pitcher #1 is removed from the game. The player who had previously been a CR for the pitcher is now playing in the field. Pitcher #2 gets a hit. Coach wants to use pitcher #1 as a CR. Game resumes and DHC calls the illegal CR to the attention of the ump. What I feel is clear: Pitcher #1 as an illegal CR is now an illegal sub and is called out and restricted. My question: Since the CR is officially an illegal substitute, did the offense just remove Pitcher #2 from the game (which means that if he was a sub he is done for the day and if a starter he has to burn re-entry to pitch again)? (For simplicity, let's assume that Pitcher #1 and Pitcher #2 are in different spots in the batting order. This means we cannot default to making the CR a legal substitute called the wrong thing by a coach).