Jump to content

The Man in Blue

Established Member
  • Posts

    2,133
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    60

Everything posted by The Man in Blue

  1. So f--- ball is the place to work on your f---ing language? I disagree. If that is the view of f--- ball in your area, then it is the place to get better at what you are doing, not a (root) beer league for the kids to get away with things they won't get away with in other games.
  2. You have a challenge. You used it earlier. If you use up all your players, you don't get to call in more players. You used up your resources unwisely. Sorry coach. Why should anything be different? If we are just going to review everything, why bother having umpires at all. Let NY call it all remotely. While I don't like the idea of limiting what plays or types of plays can be reviewed, I have serious objection to constantly changing rules and expanding things incrementally because somebody didn't like a call the year before. Go the football route ... give coaches a FINITE number of challenges (whatever number you want) and that's it. None of this "Well, we can't review it this inning, but if the exact same thing happened the next inning we could." Asinine.
  3. Old thread so a tangent story ... why not? 14u softball (good competitive games) ... runners have been asking for time all day when sliding and we hadn't been granting it. Girl cranks a triple, comes diving into third base and her left hand gets in on a close play. I give a huge, loud SAFE! Then she raises her hand off the base to ask for time. I shake my head and give a huge, loud OUT!
  4. Do you think he did? I really thought it looked like he was turning to avoid being hit in the face, not moving his head into the path. With the TV angle, I can't say I disagree, just that I saw it differently. πŸ˜‰
  5. ... and therein lies the problem. If they don't have a rule set they are playing by, then I'm going with your call of safe. It is wrong under every known published rule set ... but you said so and they couldn't point to a proper rule set to use. If they argue, award him home. πŸ˜‰
  6. Putting himself into the position to make the throw more difficult ... Isn't a batter crowding the plater doing the same thing? He doesn't know where the pitch is going to go, but he is taking away space for it to happen. Isn't a batter standing still in the box when the catcher is making a play on a stealing runner at third base the same thing? I will agree, I don't like the look of it. However if we are going to say the batter being in the wrong place is NOT interference then how do you not say the same for a runner who puts himself in an advantageous position but does nothing to directly interfere with the throw? I am struggling to see the interference in the Calhoun play up above also. The argument I can see for it is that he "was watching the throw" and you may see all those strange start-stop gyrations. However if you watch the whole play, his start-stop movements were due to the ball being dropped, bobbled, and recovered -- not a throw -- and once the ball is thrown he does not move into the path. That ball is already headed at him and he turns his head so it gets his helmet, not his face.
  7. In debating this with a few other umpires, I guess the argument boils down to when and how intent manifests itself. I'm on the side of the call that was made ... the runner did not react or knowingly interfere with the throw itself. The argument in favor of this being interference falls on the question "Why else would he have veered into fair territory?" (I've not heard anybody other than me bring up the point that the catcher was standing with home plate entirely blocked. It is possible the runner was adjusting based on that.) Is "trying to make it harder" the same as intentional interference? I don't think so. Look at a slide at second base on a double play ... that is an attempt to make it harder for the fielder to complete the play. Look at the batter who wags the bat in a fake bunt on a steal. Look at the pitcher who has a funky-chicken windup. All that said ... as a Cardinals fan and an umpire, I'm not sure I'm a fan of all their "within the rulebook" base-running antics this year. It's a slippery slope.
  8. Since many of us received e-mails ads for the EvoShield mask touting the WindPact pads ... Bump for any updates?
  9. Left fist. πŸ˜‰ In NFHS, the "step and reach" provision is not specific to a potential interference/obstruction call. It comes from a definition of "initial play" that is provided in the Fed book ... Rule 2 DEFINITIONS ART. 3 . . . Initial Play. A fielder is considered to be making an initial play on a fair batted ball when she: a. Has a reasonable chance to gain control of a ground ball that no other fielder (except the pitcher) has touched. (8-6-10a) b. Has a reasonable chance to catch the ball in flight or catch the ball in flight after it touches another fielder. c. Fails to gain control of the batted ball and is within a step and a reach (in any direction) of the spot of the initial contact. ALSO NOTE: NFHS does NOT contain the "intentional" requirement that USA does.
  10. That is my answer in response to "robo-umps." The umps aren't the problem, the pitchers are. Replace the pitchers with pitching machines.
  11. Ahh ... I am laughing at this. I don't agree with the logic, but I understand it. Kind of like the difference between NFHS slow pitch and fast pitch softball. #BringingBackTheEephus
  12. I made my semi-triumphant return to volleyball today ... haven't done a match since before COVID. It reminded of this venture ... sad to see it is gone. Really just have to say thank you to @yawetag for trying to make it happen. Looks as if he hasn't been here in a few years ... hope everything is OK with him.
  13. Reduce the size of the strike zone?! I think you mean expand it to force the hitters to hit more.
  14. USA Softball 2022 8-7-J(4) Rule 8 Section 7: The runner is out ... Subsection J: When a runner interferes ... Part 4: Intentionally with any defensive player having the opportunity to make an out with the deflected batted ball. Effect: a The ball is dead. b The runner is out. c The batter-runner is awarded first base. d Runners must return to the last base touched at the time of the interference. So ... you have two questions to ask yourself: 1.) Was it intentional? 2.) Did the defensive player have an opportunity at an out after the deflection? If you answer "No" to either of those questions, you have obstruction, not interference. "That's nothing" is a cop out that doesn't exist. This is also emphasized in the Rules Supplement section for Interference.
  15. Not sure about earlier years. I had a time machine, but I forgot when I left it. (If it was worded like that, yes.)
  16. Glad to see a fellow Illinoisan on here! East central ... Champaign area? I have a set of 17" shin guards that I acquired from a retiree ... I'll check to see what they are. They might not be any better than what you have, but I can't recall. I'll hit the garage tomorrow night.
  17. My shin guards grunt and groan every time I move into a squat. Yeah ... it's definitely the shin guards. πŸ˜‰
  18. "It is not a foul tip unless it is caught, and any foul tip that is caught ... " 😬 EDIT ... Disregard this section. I was watching it on a small screen and thought it did hit the glove first. I don't call LL, so I could be wrong, but the way I read that they have it as a foul tip. "It is not a catch if it is a rebound, unless the ball has first touched the catcher's glove or hand." I didn't know we had rebounds in baseball, but I am assuming the OP video is a prime example of a rebound. The English teacher in me is straining muscles reading that LL passage.
  19. Not sure how seriously you were feeling it, but if you are thinking that, I'd say you are already on your way to being that guy. Listen to your body! Especially if you are working alone! Even on days when we don't think it is that bad, it can sneak up and snake bite you. But not every day.
  20. Maybe MLB is going after the wrong demographic?
  21. Just some random thoughts on those topics ... While I do not disagree with a pitch clock, it is very different in baseball than in basketball. In basketball, milking the clock is a valid game strategy. In baseball, it's just a whole lot of nothing. Basketball used it to generate more offense. Baseball is using it to tell people to get moving because the fans are bored. An overall game clock to end the game is the difference. What would increase the level of civility in the game? When somebody gets tossed, security hauls them off if they don't leave. No more of this "You're outta' here ... but we're going to continue to humor you and watch your little temper tantrum for another 2-3 minutes, so go ahead and get your money's worth." [UEFL ka-ching] Benches clearing for any reason (other than a player turning into a zombie or werewolf in the dugout) should not be "a step towards ejection".
  22. The romantic in me wants to agree. The math teacher in me says β€œIt needs to be a Pythagorean Triple.”
Γ—
Γ—
  • Create New...