ElkOil

Are you a god?

I don't disagree, and your point is well taken about taking the time needed to evaluate the play before taking your turn to 1B. But it's doable since you're right there at the time and if your position is good, you only have to do a quick turn to get the play at 1B. And you can get that turn in less time than the throw.

It kinda seems like according to you guys, I can't do this. And yet...

Asking umpires how to coach isn't what this is about. That's your job. There are worse things in this world than teaching kids playing a game to concede the out in favor of a dirty play or causing injury. No, you don't teach the defense to block the base, but they do have the right to field the throw. And how to handle that is up to you, Coach.

Cut two eye holes in an old sofa cushion and tie it to your face with dental floss?

The injury the runner experienced is irrelevant to the situation and has no bearing on the call. To second guess the umpire would be foolish since none of us saw what he saw. However, it's highly unlikely that given your scenario, the first baseman would be guilty of obstruction since the defense is allowed to field a thrown ball and make a play on the runner. Obstruction usually occurs when a fielder -- without the ball or not in the process of making a play -- hinders a runner.

This call gets more difficult the more you try to make your point. I don't agree that it's as difficult as you state. Many calls are more routine, yet more difficult like trying to see a tag from a proper position, yet you're straight-lined. By comparison, two force outs are much easier for me. For you and perhaps others, this is a difficult call. I have no issues with it. We all have our kryptonite.

Eh, I don't see a lot to talk about. Beckham and Barrett were thoroughly engaged just before. It's not as if something was said from a distance that should have been ignored.

Maybe if you were, I dunno... nice about it, @MadMax would indulge you. That's a lesson most of us learn in kindergarten.

I've worked this into a pre-game with partners with whom I'm unfamiliar. I have no issue taking INT on the back half if I'm BU, since I can watch for it, then get the play at 1B. But I'll be sure my partner knows it's PU's textbook responsibility.

As others said, there is no rule, so you won't be able to find it. What happens among umpires is, at one point someone misinterpreted the rule and called a runner out for high-fiving a base coach. Other coaches file protests or call umpiring associations and those umpires who are Rules Interpreters weigh in and send out memos to umpire associations and its members. So we get emails about it and the subject gets worked into clinics and training. These things can also work themselves into tests many of us take to qualify for playoff assignments and other types of games. The upshot is that instructors tell us something like, "A high-five does not constitute an assist;" or it becomes a test question and that's about as official as it gets. UNFORTUNATELY, new umpires come along who don't have the benefit of all this information; they haven't read the case plays book, haven't been to training, haven't read the previous emails, haven't been to clinics. Maybe they used to be a coach and believe the old myth. I've had partners of mine who actually believed a batters hands are part of the bat. AND, maybe there's some seasoned umpires who have been around forever, but have never bothered to be students of the game and learn these things. Oh, there are reasons why these myths persist. But they are myths. We can't produce something that isn't in the book, but we can give you the benefit of our knowledge and experience.

Specific to springs in these applications, do they truly dampen? My rudimentary understanding of springs is that they transfer energy rather than actually dampen it.

It's exciting to me to know you and people like you are working on the next iteration of these things. I've worn a TM a few times, but have otherwise worm the Wilson Shock 2.0 HSM. The other day I decided to upgrade and ordered the Force 3 HSM from Ump-Attire (as well as a new pair of plate shoes). I'm stoked to see it in person.

What kind was it? I wonder if there are others with more absorbent pads? I bet @MadMax could give us some insight.

Wear a helmet, folks. Whatever the cost, it's worth it.

I'm getting it from home, but not when I'm working on my cellular wifi. It only happens when I'm posting or trying to link to a video.

In fairness, it's entirely possible a coach saw something we didn't see. We do miss calls and they may have a better angle. Surely, a 1B coach has a better angle for some swipe tags at 2B than when we're in B or C. But that's not the issue because it's easy enough for an umpire to explain by saying something like, "That's what I had, coach," and leaving it at that. And we're held to a higher standard than players in regards to how well they perform. We're paid professionals. We have to be at the top of our game.

Street signs and buses for me, mostly. I'm getting pretty good at it.

Hold the phone. Do you mean to tell me I've read these posts about a hundred times and never saw that you typed "foul popup?" Jeez Louise. Sorry about that.

Was it not you who said, "I believe on a tailor made double play ball that hits R1 going to second, you could get two outs (batter/runner also out) on this in FED, but not in OBR unless it was "willful and deliberate" Another exception to the batter/runner getting first base would be if another runner interferes with a foul popup. Batter would just continue at-bat with another strike."? There is no instance in which a fair batted ball would return the BR to the box. I will double down and say again that your example of a popup was addressed in a video @Stk004 posted and another link that I posted. I was referencing your post and the OP at the same time. Perhaps it was not as eloquent as it could have been, but I'll stand by my responses to the OP and your posts.

On a foul ball, INT or not, the batter stays at the plate. But your OP stated a batted ball hits a runner. That's a different situation, and BR is awarded 1B, as I said. There isn't a situation in which the batter returns to the plate after a fair batted ball -- he'll either be put out or he'll acquire a base somehow. You asked if that batter "re-bats." No he doesn't since his at-bat hasn't come to an end. He remains at bat because he hit a foul ball.

Unless the first pitch is thrown, we don't get paid.

As far as I know, the batter returning is never the case in an INT call. If INT is called on a runner when the batter hasn't put the ball in play, the batter continues his at bat. If a runner is called for INT on a batted ball, the interferer is out and BR awarded 1B.

I don't know of any provision in any rule set that allows a batter to continue an at-bat after an INT call on a batted ball since the ball was put in play, then is dead and the player who interferes is out. The BR is awarded 1B. @Stk004 posted a video illustrating your popup example yesterday. Here's another: http://m.mlb.com/video/v1530313583/baltb-morrison-makes-the-catch-despite-interference/?query=interference