Jump to content

beerguy55

Established Member
  • Content Count

    2,634
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    21

beerguy55 last won the day on September 3

beerguy55 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

708 Good

More information about you

  • How did you hear about Umpire-Empire?
    Search Engine (Google, Yahoo, Bing, ...)

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. This is a lesson for young umps too - don't assume anything. Once had a game, tied in last inning, bases loaded two out, easy fly ball to F4, and he dropped it. R1 either not realizing it was two outs, or just being lazy, never ran, and even though it took a couple of seconds for F4 to retrieve the ball, he threw the ball to F6 for an easy force. Problem was, only one ump this game, the inexperienced umpire, after seeing the ball drop (and R3 had long since touched home), turned his back to the play and started to leave assuming the game over - he never saw the play at second and really had no choice but to call R1 safe after realizing there was still a game going on.
  2. Catchers do/did it all the time - especially before the collision rules were implemented...but the design of the glove makes it easier to pop the ball out, so we teach them to reinforce with the second had. I prefer to see the kids place/secure the bare hand over the ball in the glove, if there's time to do so.
  3. The question is whether or not he interfered with anything, in your hypothetical. If there's no interference/hindrance there's nothing to penalize.
  4. Any rule in FED or OBR that mentions the word "lodge" - particularly the ones that mention a player's equipment....I see the word 16 times in FED and seven times in OBR. None of them fit the description, or spirit, of the play described. In the OP "lodges" between the (presumably) chin of the mask and the top of the chest protector is no different than "lodges" between his chin and sternum, or his arm and his side, or between his legs...it's being held between two properly worn pieces of equipment, it's not "stuck" there. It's not "in" the equipment or uniform. Otherwise, you'd have to rule a ball "lodged" if the catcher blocks a pitch/throw between his legs and is holding it between his two shin guards.
  5. Dictionary definition vs rulebook definition. As described this is not a rulebook lodged ball.
  6. Possession requires the ball to be secured in hand or glove. This is not possession. This is also true for a catch on a batted ball - a ball lodged between arm and ribs would not be a catch until someone grabs it with their hand before it touches the ground. As well as a throw to first base - ball lodged between arms and ribs, with foot on base, would not be an out.
  7. Even if you were to take that piece literally in defining its illegality, there still has to be some kind of timeline...usually when you are saying a person must (or must not) do something, in the context of the rules, it is associated with "before" and/or "while" doing something else. So, one could get ridiculous and give the pitcher half a picosecond to drop his hands. The rule doesn't say "immediately" nor does it say one second, three seconds, or five standard Terran orbits. So does every umpire get to make up his own time limit? Or one could be reasonable and realize that the requirement is more about doing it before what he must do next.
  8. Yes, and then KC protested, and the call was overturned...the "penalty" should have been simply the removal of the bat. Brett's home run was reinstated, and the final four outs of the game were replayed a month or so later. This was consistent with a ruling made several years before where the umpires did NOT negate the home run, and the umpires' decision was upheld on protest.
  9. Some rules are meant for safety. Some rules are a matter of economics. And even when they do nullify an advantage, there isn't a real "penalty". Hockey has lots of rules where the "remedy" is simply a stoppage in play...you can decide if that's a "penalty". Offside - the advantage is nullified by a whistle and a face off outside the offensive zone. In short, there's no real punitive penalty to remove any incentive to try to break the rule from time to time. The George Brett pine tar issue is a perfect example of a non-penalty rule, that has nothing to do with advantages...the "rule" was put in place to simply keep balls from getting tarred up, not to nullify any perceived advantage...the "penalty" was/is to simply remove the bat, so Brett's out call was overturned on protest. (and it wasn't the first time the issue had come up...it was I believe the last time before the rule book was clarified)
  10. Or is it more about not separating the hands before stepping back on???
  11. beerguy55

    base runner

    Well, if the umpire immediately called you out F6 has no reason to tag you, does he? At some point he'd just give up the chase and go touch third. So running safely to third after you're called out wouldn't really be remarkable. This should be all the same in baseball and softball. You may be out, but not for the reason the ump stated. You are not allowed to travel, in reverse, beyond the base you occupied at time of pitch. What I don't know is if this means you are auto-out, or if you still have to be tagged (ie. you can't run back to first and be safe there) - even if there were no other runners in play. As to the question of leaving the base path. The question is whether or not your established base path is a line between you and the base, between you and the two bases, or from the base to you to infinity behind you - in short...as long as you maintain a straight line backwards, can you retreat from just off second base, to second base, and then all the way to the warning track? Going three feet (this part is a judgment call) past the base (you no longer occupy) in the wrong direction could qualify as off the base path. Spirit of the rule vs letter of the rule (and there may be a few different rules at play here), the judgment of your three foot statement aside, which is probably the strongest argument, I think there are more reasons to call you out than safe here. (I'd even accept an umpire making a "travesty of game" argument, and if an umpire wanted to argue abandonment I wouldn't hold it against him either). You are forced to third. Second base isn't a safe haven for you as long as R1 and the batter/runner are alive. Edit - also - if R1 reached second base while you were somewhere past it on your way to right/center field, if you are not out for retreating beyond second base, then he is out for "passing" you. You would also be required to retouch second on your way back to third - and could be subject to appeal. Softball does have a rule where the batter is out if he/she retreats towards home (at all) to avoid a tag (dead ball, other runners return TOP), but contrary to popular belief it does not apply to any forced runners...only the batter/runner.
  12. beerguy55

    Baseballs

    The rule in 1919/1920 did NOT make the spitball illegal - there was no ban...MLB teams simply had to designate who their spitballers were, and were limited to two - that was likely more a move to try to generate more offense...or at least give batters a fighting chance to actually see the ball - there's no evidence that it was meant to be a trial run, an incremental step, or a planned precursor to further action, although it was certainly an ongoing point of debate, and I think if anything the 1919 rule was simply a compromise. As with many things, we argue and argue about what might happen eventually, and need to wait until what "might" happen actually happens to actually take the real action. After Chapman was killed, that accelerated, or put to bed, any argument about keeping/removing the spitball, so after the 2020 season it (and all doctoring) was banned - except for those grandfathered in...the guys whose careers depended on it. A fair compromise. Carl Mays, the pitcher whose pitch killed Chapman, was not one of the 17 pitchers grandfathered. Chapman's death also generated a practice in keeping more baseballs available for games, to get more "clean" balls into play...Chapman was hit in the head due to him simply not being able to see the ball, with all the junk and dirt on it, combined with poor lighting. Now, of course, none of that stopped Gaylord Perry from having a Hall of Fame career around the spitball (both using it, and pretending to use it)...including writing an auto-biography about his spitball usage...while he was still playing.
  13. As a coach, because of the explanation you gave in real time, I wouldn't even leave the bench. And you need to give a very short leash to any coach who does. In fact, if you granted the other coach his request, that's when you're going to get an argument from me. Because now I perceive you're pandering to their coach, and letting him push you around. And if, in this scenario, you did get help, and the other ump convinced you to change your call, I'm almost certainly getting tossed - at that point, I don't even care what the right call is. You made a strong, definitive, well-grounded call, and then you let the other coach bully you into changing it...that's the optics you're presenting.
  14. beerguy55

    Baseballs

    It's a bit of both. In the book Living on the Black (a must read for any baseball fan) Tom Glavine talks about, as he reached the end of his career, some 15 years ago, the reluctance (if not ignorance) of younger pitchers to hold onto and keep using a scuffed ball, and he had to teach them to try to hold onto said ball as long as they can (also made a point of telling a side-arm pitcher to NOT use a scuffed ball).
  15. beerguy55

    Baseballs

    As stated, it's not about the ball being dirty, it's about the ball being scuffed. And it's the same reason a pitcher isn't allowed to use an emery board to doctor the ball. Imperfections on the side of the ball can make the ball move in unpredictable ways...the scuffs also give the pitcher another way to grip the ball. The movement on a pitch is caused in large part by the seams. The seams are where the ball is gripped to influence the spin of the ball, and the seams' movement as the ball spins cause it the ball change direction. The most likely cause of the homerun boom in recent years is the balls are likely being made with tighter seams. Scuff marks add another factor to that - it not only gives the pitcher an advantage (usually) it can also be a safety issue. The spitball (and other practices under the same umbrella) was banned after Ray Chapman was killed by a pitch - he was hit by a combined result of a ball that was very difficult to see, and moved unpredictably. (as a point of interest, helmets weren't made mandatory for another 30 years). Beyond that, MLB does it because they can. The retired balls become BP and practice balls...or donations to kids' sports organizations, etc, etc.
×
×
  • Create New...