Velho

So you answered C and it's wrong? (which is what I would answer btw) Follow through interference (6-2-d) comes to mind (as a stretch) - which would be R1 back to 1B, so B. Could one talk themselves into A if R1 had it stolen anyway? So then it's just a 'don't do that'?

At work we call this "non regrettable attrition"

Triple play. Prompting your thought process, not trying to be a school marm: how would it be different if the fielder tagged 3B, then R3, then threw to 2B?

If feel you brother, I feel you. Separately, um,you doing ok? Sunday is a day of rest and relaxation my man.

Another one from today. Visconti did the same: appealed (off camera) before sending the Challenge to New York. Which explains why Murphy never came out to PU (I was shocked he didn't come out until I heard that part). Bonus: Announcers have been pretty darn good in all the clips I've pulled today. Dead Ball Check Swing MLB 2026.04 - HD 720p.mov

To add to @Coach Carl's great response: Forced is a state of being for a runner and not exclusive to how they can be put out. A Forced runner that is tagged is still a force out such that, if that's the third out no run can score on that play. Even though the appeal for not retouching after catching a batted ball in flight can be done by tagging the base, it's not a force play (though easy to understand the misconception). It's a time play.

Nobody on, shot down the RF line, Diamondbacks Ball-Dude (that does appear to be his official title) tries to field it but misses. RF eases up but then plays on to start a relay and get BR out 3B. (h/t @MadMax). 4 nice takeaways (not putting words in his mouth but these are heavily informed by Max): - Post umpire conference, PU explains the call using rulebook terminology. - U1 had fair and then, I suppose, knowing the field is tight (unlike some of our "oh yeah, there is a gate that won't close down there" fields) abandons tracking the ball to get BR's 1B touch. - On slowmo you can see that U2 and PU had the INT and called Time. Primary responsibility of that ball is U1 but both used their minimal responsibility / adequate time to watch the ball all the way as secondary coverage (fortunately!). - So, that begs the question, why did U3 get such tunnel vision he didn't see Time was called? U2 is not far off his line of sight to the ball. Would have been nice not to have the added confusion from banging the Out and then having to unwind it. Authorized Participant Interference Diamnondback Alan Porter 2026.04 - HD 1080p.mov

Alan Porter with great mechanics to avoid confusion and debate. And it seems to have worked! h/t @MadMax and kudos to Alan Porter (one of my favorites) Doing mostly yutes, I do this particularly on the square to bunt and they get plunked since I'm easily blocked out (especially when they open up instead of closing off to the pitch). BU ha a great view if they attempted at the ball (sometimes in self defense to ward it off). I callously come up with "did they go?" as the kid is crying. Removes ambiguity and a delayed decision. Gives a nice window to tell the appraise manager Out of HBP while the batter is being tended too. Only the most pathological coach is going to fight with me as the kid is on the ground crying. Dead Ball Strike Check Swing Appeal Alan Porter 2026.04 - HD 1080p.mov

On to the learnings and rumination for our future plays... The binary schools of thought are: A) Ordinary effort for this level on this day (to account for wind). That would be determined at point the ball is hit high enough to be a fly ball fieldable by an infielder but NOT based on what these particular players are doing. Example: pop up to where the second baseman is playing at 10U / 12U and older (at 8U it is not unexpected that F4 runs away ). b) Ordinary effort for these players on this day on this play - that's the "at apex, player camped" school of thought. Example: same pop up to F4, camped, "I got it, I got it" and you believe him. I know the pragmatic answer that drives ow it's called 90%+ of the time but think it's worth delving into given there are the two different schools of thought, as evidenced by our own discussion.

Have to give announcers credit when they do get it right. They summarized it well. Clemson Virginia IFF 2026.04.16 Announcers Summarize - HD 1080p.mov

Sidetracking into the EJ... After seeing VA Manager post game comments I went back to the video. While the confusion contributed (I imagine? VA had scored three runs that inning to go up 6-3 and he didn't know what was going to be called yet so not sure why Manager was so fired up) the ejection was about "protecting my 3rd base coach" because as PU was coming to talk to Manager, U3 (off-camera) was approaching / yelling and PU with hand up (arguably) dismissively told him to be go back to the coaches box, I don't talk to you. Manager then jumped on PU and after a warning said "you've f****d this up before" and that got him tossed. Clemson Virginia IFF 2026.04.16 Ejection - HD 1080p.mov Announcers got it (though they didn't really know they had).

Here is the play. Warning - it's ugly. Japan Home Plate Umpire Hit by Bat 2026 - HD 1080p.mov

Two discussion points this play triggers for me: 1) If IFF isn't called real time but in retrospect it should have*, how do you deal with that? @grayhawk covered that well. Batter out, runners return, move on. * I'm having problems finding cites for the generally accepted practice of calling it after the fact. I see it in J/R (page 54 16th edition/2022). Anyone have anything? 2) One of my windmills: A) Should it be called based on the location of the ball for that level? B) Should it be called based on the location of the ball for where those fielders started (if shifted for example)? c) Should it be called based on the actual actions of those exact players on that exact play (i.e. the "see the fielder camped at the apex")? In this one, imo, this one meets A and B - that ball should be caught with reasonable effort. As for C, none of the defense ever had that play managed. F5, F1, and F3 all were spectators letting F2 struggle. You can be assured the defense coach was on F5 or F1 for not calling for that ball.

Especially given measurement error is somewhere between 0.125"-0.375" or more. Yes. Two different planes so yes/no & no/yes is possible. Neither is 3D (and I researched Korea, it isn't technically 3D either). PX is front of the plate (not sure if that's knees to midpoint or the new height %). ABS is midpoint of the plate on height %.

Disclosure: Biased party (Go M's) The tag was closer than one would think for "not in a position to be able to retire the runner"

Glad it sounds likes he's ok. I met him last winter at Willie Traynor's outreach clinic. Nice guy.

Because it's not about sport or competition. It's become about Money, Glory, and Legacy. (fwiw - I agree with you)

Runner must touch second base and then first base. This touch of second base will cure his prior miss. Failing to touch second base and then touching first base leaves him exposed to being out on proper appeal.

Aiding the defense? My instinct was it was hurting the defense by leaving it ambiguous if the timed run scored or not until it was too late for the defense to appeal. In OP for example, declaring that run as scoring would (maybe?) make the defense realize they should appeal that runner since he never retouched.

You all are forgetting ball bearings. They are the future.

Came across this on Reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/Umpire/comments/1slyerj/comment/ogb0w8u/ Situation: HS. R1& R2, 1 out. Shallow fly to CF. Offense thinks there are 2 outs, sends runners. R2 scores ahead of R1 getting tagged on appeal. From the PU: "I back up to line up that tag and home plate and per the mechanics in place waited until the infielders were all off the field and then announced the run scores. You can disagree and say I should have announced it immediately, but the mechanics in place in my association were of a 4th out like that is possible to wait until the appeal is impossible before announcing the run." Does your association give explicit guidance on timing of scoring the run on this type of play?

Which #10 & #12?

I have no doubt LL is missing out on good umpires for Regions and WS because of not even paying for travel and lodging. But, given that about 50% of Regional/WS umpires are now the same every year (willingly, happily doing it year after year on their own dime), plus LL being oversubscribed in applications such that they are leaving some decent to very good umpires unassigned but those umps reapply year after year, there is no pressure for change. Local level is more well, localized, and a different debate imo.

Those two words are carrying a lot of weight in that rule. Agreed it would be more logically linear for the exception to be at the start of the rule instead of any the end.

What if my ear is itchy?