CJK

R3 is out, B/R is awarded first, R1 is awarded second, and R2 is awarded third.

I have nothing of value to add here. I just hate that anybody ever calls the follow-through a "backswing."

I'll assume you're asking about the look-back rule, and whether the runner should be ruled out in each of these situations. I'm also assuming that the runner has left the base during play (e.g. leading off on the pitch), and the ball is being returned to the circle at the end of the play. I'll go with: 1. No violation (ball is not controlled by pitcher in circle). 2. No violation (ball is not controlled by pitcher in circle). 3. The runner is entitled to read the situation and then must commit to either returning or advancing.* 4. The runner is entitled to read the situation and then must commit to either returning or advancing.* * - If I've made an incorrect assumption and the runner is actually on the base and leaves it while the ball is controlled by the pitcher in the circle, then the runner has violated the look-back rule, the ball is dead, and the runner is out.

What other aspects of judgement and game management shall I put to a vote in order to demonstrate that I'm not driven by a "fragile ego"? Shall I ask the defense and offense to vote on each play and only offer my judgement when they disagree? Many, maybe even most, people still believe (as evidenced by the almost weekly rules forum posts) that getting the third out of an inning on a tag-up appeal is a force out, and thus would negate any runs that scored on the play. Shall I let them agree that the run doesn't score, even though I know it should, to demonstrate that my ego isn't "fragile"? I'm not saying that the umpire didn't handle this situation poorly, because I think he probably did. I just think the trigger words (fragile, gasp, refuse, reasonable) are unnecessary. (I also think, based on #5, that the official scorekeeper should consult a doctor immediately.)

You're entitled to that opinion, of course. I'd think people would be glad that he was already signalling to get his team looking at the play, just to reduce the amount of time that people are standing around on the field waiting for someone to decide if it's worth standing around with headphones on waiting for someone in New York to decide. I mean, if we're going to pretend that the 45 seconds saved on an intentional walk once a week is worthwhile, then I think we also have to pretend that it's worth saving 5 seconds by signaling the dugout that there might be something worth looking at before the umpire has rendered a decision.

Or go check out tiny-kid coach-pitch, where umpires don't need gear, there are 20 *adorable* little spuds in their saggy-baggy uniforms running all over the place, and the coaches don't have time to fuss because they're all busy herding cats. Hardly anybody even knows the score, the parents are otherwise occupied getting the post-game snacks ready, and everybody from all 3 teams (home, visitor, and umpire) are working together to provide the players with a positive experience. Watch it or umpire it; either way, it's an absolute blast and a great reminder not necessarily of *how* the game should be played, but *why*.

In most levels of baseball, you won't kill the play automatically. You may well entertain a request for time if the ball needs to be exchanged, the runner needs to discard or retrieve protective equipment, or whatever. In fast pitch softball, an umpire might call time when the ball is controlled by the pitcher in the circle and all runners have stopped on a base. Umpires would typically call time when there's a courtesy runner, an equipment issue, bases need to be cleaned, or the defense is doing the stupid "hold the tag until the umpire calls time" thing. In slow pitch softball, the umpire will generally call time after every play (when there are still runners on base) once the ball is controlled in the vicinity of the infield, the defense is not attempting any further play, and all runners have stopped advancing.

I'm going to go with yes, yes, and yes. NO.

Size is just like temperance, mobility, confidence, attitude, and rules knowledge when it comes to umpiring: it won't hold you back until it holds you back.

Your response: "Since 15 seconds ago when it hit the bat and went outside the lines to the fence."

I know I've heard people on here say before that your intake of water and your sleep schedule will have a huge impact on your progress.

The play at first is not a force. A force can only be created by the batter becoming a batter-runner. Once a trailing runner has been retired (in this case, the batter-runner, who was retired on the catch), there can be no force play. The play at first is a live-ball appeal, and is therefore a time play (meaning that runs count if they score before the actual appeal is made on the runner for not re-touching).

Hm. I think 2 seems a little extravagant, but then again, who the hell am I to tell you how to spend your rat farts?

This discussion makes me wonder why the padding on the top of the wall is yellow, because it doesn't make sense. If the padding on the front of the wall was yellow, and the ball hit it, it would be in play and no longer in flight. If it hit the top of the wall and continued out, it would obviously have left the field of play in flight (before touching the top of the wall). And if the ball came to rest on the top of the fence, it would be out of play and a home run (as it should be). So why have a yellow line on the horizontal surface at the top of the wall? Isn't that really the entire source of the problem?

So you find your spot about 15 feet from 3B, several feet inside the foul line, and if there's an overthrow, you drop step left, cruise home, and get there in plenty of time. And, as a bonus, you can get in on the 3B end of the rundown, take a tag from a great angle, and not leave your partner to eat a sh!t sandwich while you're anchored to the plate, missing a pretty good game.

USA Softball (formerly ASA) just re-branded this year, and offers powder w/navy panels, navy w/powder panels, and pink w/navy panels. They all have the self-styled collars and the only collar accent is seam piping in the trim color. No red or white anywhere.

True, as long as the batter did not strike at the pitch before it touched him. I know you know this, but in the interest of correctness, if the batter is touched by the pitched ball while striking at it, we've got a dead ball strike instead of HBP. As for the OP: The batter doesn't have to "swing." Anything that the umpire judges as "striking at" the ball is enough to call a strike.

I read @Mudisfun's post before I watched the video, so I knew there was a tag to watch, and I still missed it the first time. At the levels I work, this play is a litmus test for whether you actually have the respect of a coach, because s/he's going to want to talk to you, s/he's going to ask you to see if your partner can help you, and your partner doesn't have a look at all. So now you're going to have to say to that coach, "Chris, we have to go with what I had. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I didn't have a tag. If I missed it, I missed it." And either s/he's going to appreciate your body of work and your honesty, express some disappointment, and move on, or else s/he's going to go bananas over a situation that s/he already knows you handled as well as you can. I hope you never have to deal with this call. When you do, I hope you only ever experience the stinging disappointment from knowing that you didn't measure up for a coach who respects you, and not the strain on your rotator cuff (and paperwork) when a coach who doesn't respect you decides to show his/her ass.

The plate guy looks like Dan Bellino.

May, 1984 -- Detroit vs Boston. Marty Castillo of the Tigers doubled, Sox thought he missed first. F4 Jerry Remy stood outside the foul line behind 1st base in case F1 Bruce Hurst threw wildly on the appeal. The appeal was denied and Hurst was charged with a balk that moved Castillo to third.

Stay on the outside of the diamond, along the "rim" of the grass.

Did he get tagged by the ball, the hand holding the ball, the glove holding the ball, or the glove holding the hand holding the ball? If he did, he's out on the tag. If he didn't, he's not out on a tag. There is no provision for a fielder tagging a runner with his head. Past that, if the contact with the catcher's head was judged to be intentional/malicious, the runner may be declared out, and possibly ejected. Also some rule sets prohibit an attempt to jump over a defender in some circumstances, and allow the runner to be declared out for a violation.

No one asked me and I'm sure nobody cares what I think, but this makes me sad. It means that the defense no longer has to pay attention to whether there's a touch in order to decide whether to appeal, because they can watch for this cue from the umpire.

I believe the standard @MadMax answer to your problem is "kill the rivet, reposition fabric/padding to your liking, insert Chicago screw."

Man, I think it's awfully tough to judge him as "interfer[ing] with the fielder taking the throw at first base" from that picture.