Jump to content

Velho

Established Member
  • Posts

    798
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Everything posted by Velho

  1. I agree that's likely (if not probable). The burden of proof is very high to call this INF though.
  2. I assume you mean to explore the gray of an action less obvious than this:
  3. I seem to recall hearing about that being the case (or in the past having been the case) as a state NHFS mod. Missouri maybe?
  4. Velho

    Catch or no Catch?

    I don't think this is proof of much. It' possible and reading the body language would be key (again, HTBT) but it's not a given depending on the age/level of play & mistrust of umpires to get the call right. It's just as likely to fall into the "better safe than sorry" bucket.
  5. Velho

    Catch or no Catch?

    Obviously a had to be there (HTBT) situation but, in my minds eye, the OP action is likely a discrete act to try and double the runner off, especially if F5 was playing it like a F3. If F5 had enough control to then try and tag R3, seems that would establish the validity of the tag and "prove that he has complete control of the ball" regardless of the control surviving that needless tag of an already out runner. Again, all HTBT. Not playing the throw back similar to an F3 or juggling the ball between tagging the bag and R3 would change things.
  6. There was one with more time for the catcher to react earlier this year (but still within the infield to meet the written exception)
  7. Velho

    Balk conundrum

    Nice and tidy then: To runner/batter: "Are you going to run?" R/B "Nope" --> "Time! You [point at B/R] in the box. You [point at R2] to third base" If B/R runs, see if he makes it to 1B and respond accordingly (if F2 is serious he'll hold the ball).
  8. Echoing @Jimurray, this was NOT previously an out in any situation. The rule changed turned it into a caught strike. Prior to the rule change, the only caught strike was "a rebound [that] first touched the catcher’s glove or hand"
  9. “Ninety feet between home plate and first base may be the closest man has ever come to perfection." -Red Smith
  10. That Kirk blocking will get called every time this year (just like it was here on Aug 7). That wasn't the most controversial blocking yesterday though. Marlins got called for blocking when F2 placed the middle of his foot on the foul line.
  11. Too bad it was foul, would have liked to see replay rule on catch/no catch
  12. Velho

    Infield fly

    This one from 2012? Here is write up from that time that (at quick glance) looks to be a good summary. https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1360712-cardinals-vs-braves-infield-fly-rule-protest-denied-as-umpires-get-call-right tl;dr: It's judgmental, is level of play dependent, and the fielder doesn't have to be in the "infield". So, if you need an unequivocal "yes" or "no" 10 years later for whatever reason, then it's "yes". Text of the rule for completeness: An INFIELD FLY is a fair fly ball (not including a line drive nor an attempted bunt) which can be caught by an infielder with ordinary effort, when first and second, or first, second and third bases are occupied, before two are out. The pitcher, catcher and any outfielder who stations himself in the infield on the play shall be considered infielders for the purpose of this rule. There is much more written about it in the rulebook and secondary sources but that's the direct rule.
  13. Agreed, though I've been told many things I haven't been smart enough to follow
  14. I've adopted the mst3k mindset (and not just on the field). If anyone get 8% of the jokes, that's a lot.
  15. Right on. Cure the issue vs some half-pregnant approach. I feel obligated to post this:
  16. Agreed. They don't want the Barry Bonds treatment for a kid where they never get a chance to play. My issue is the "it's a horrible idea, but you can do it once" offends my CPA sensibilities. Something is either good to go or it's not, imo.
  17. How so? You always had to have 1 adult in the dugout on offense and this won't change that (that I can see). This just mean a kid won't be a base coach. When on defense, all coaches (whether 2 or 3) are in the dugout with 3-6 kids so that's not a big difference.
  18. If I read all this right, for LL Majors and below: CHANGE #3 - Coaches warm-up pitchers, except Tournament Play. My comment: Good for regular season (does Coach have to wear a mask?) but a regular vs postseason difference CHANGE #4 - Expand the run-rule to 15 after 3 Innings, 10 after 4 Innings, and 8 after 5 Innings My comment: End games that the outcome is 99% in the bag, all good. CHANGE #5B - Can only issue IBB to a player once per game. My comment: Personally, I've never understood the "it's ok to do but just once" concept. CHANGE #7 - Remove reduction of Tournament coaches for roster size. My comment: I guess the minimum play difference of 14 players is enough incentive for larger rosters.
  19. I think you're right since "Y.O.I." (Year of Implementation) is "N/A". Thanks, this is my first year exposed to the details.
  20. Oh snap. Did they just change the LL baseball rule to 'out' for leaving early? Is there a threshold to pass or majority rules? I'm a bit in disbelief.
  21. Thank you for speaking to this. It so rarely is addressed. Umpires below HS are the largest group of umpires and the least experienced. New(er) umpires struggle with what the zone should be - especially after seeing all the backlash on LLWS ball/strike calls - and people rarely will talk to them about the zone beyond the rule book, even when they plead for direction.
  22. Interesting. Hadn't heard that one. I see how it can be useful.
  23. Seconded. Sorry guys. I had the same thing in mind. I went back through 9 games and couldn't find it. I took notes when it happened but without enough detail since "I'd remember" - Ha! on me. If your memory is better (like team involved) I'll go look.
×
×
  • Create New...