agdz59

The way I read FED 8-3-6(c), the defense does get a chance to appeal on a ball thrown out of play. Let me know if I am interpreting it wrong: Dead Ball. The dead-ball appeal may be made: 1) Once all runners have completed their advancement and time has been called, a coach or any defensive player, with or without the ball, may make a verbal appeal on a runner missing a base or leaving a base too soon on a caught fly ball. The administering umpire should then make a decision on the play. 2) If the ball has gone out of play, runners must be given the opportunity to complete their base-running responsibilities before the dead-ball appeal can be made.

I had never considered this. Baseball is such a beautiful, nuanced, infinitely complex game.

Thank you TMIB, that is exactly what I meant.

I stand corrected.

How about the head coaches spin with their foreheads on a bat and then see which one makes it the farthest to first base before falling down?

Don't have to but 10-1-4, 10-2-3(l) allow them too.

At 13U, I don't have a problem putting them back. JV? Hmmm... Varsity? Play on. YMMV

I think you did the right thing. There is a FED rule that someone will cite that allows the umpires to repair their mistakes before the next play. You did that.

How soon before they're wearing "Should have gone to TLC Lasik Eye Center." on the back of their shirts? Manfred has been terrible for baseball IMO.

I wouldn't call it. You can fake to third under NFHS. Once off the rubber, he's an infielder. I've got nothing. Let's see what others think.

It depends on your definition of 'grasp'. He placed his hand/fingers around the ball on the ground but never lifted it while still in contact with the base. Is that a 'grasp'? Or is it a 'trap'? Is there any meaningful difference in this case? I called the out FWIW and got no argument, but I've wondered because in other contexts (fly ball catch) the fielder needs to demonstrate control. Has F3 demonstrated control by putting his hand around the ball on the ground without lifting it? Do we care?

Hi all, NFHS ruleset. Had this a few games ago, thought about it and looked it up. NFHS seems to be ambiguous. The play: No runners, batter hits ground ball to F6 who throws to F3. F3 drops the ball then grasps/traps it on the ground near his feet while touching the base before BR arrives. F3 never picked the ball up from the ground but hand and fingers were around the ball. Closest thing in the NFHS definition of a catch is 2-9-1 note: "A fielder may have the ball in his grasp even though it is touching the ground while in his glove." What about NOT in his glove?

Which is the whole point of LL. At least thats what I was there for!

Oh yes. And Dark Side of the Moon as well of course.

Don't come to southern Oregon. We wipe the crap out of the IFF. After reading responses here, I get the desire to cut down on signaling and, if you're working with guys you know, its superfluous. But for new guys and because of the ways its taught here, we all do it. YMMV.

Seems severe to the coach most times I am sure. Just like FPSR getting two outs and you always have to explain "Its a safety rule. Have them slide or get out of the way". Here it's "Your runner CANNOT initiate contact even if the catcher is in your runners path. Have them move around and trust me to get the obstruction call."

Not here. The reasoning is because PU is set and looking at 3B. U1 had the play to 2B, is closer to home being in B and can get a head start to plate if he sees the ball sailing, getting by, etc.

Awesome summary maven. When you call MC on something like this where there is contact but not a push or raised elbows, etc., do you eject? MUST you eject with MC?

The other part of this is once PU is committed to third U1 needs to be ready to bust it home in case the ball is overthrown etc at third. Easy to get caught out on that since it happens so rarely.

At least they're not making umpires run their fingers through every HS pitcher's hair. We've got that going for us.

What rule set?

It appears we are at an impasse. Mr. Blue?

Dawg, I'm old enough to have watched that play live on TV as a young little leaguer. I thought it was a dirty play at the time as did most people. I think that play damaged Rose's reputation so much it helped keep him out of the Hall. Yes, the gambling instigated it, but Fosse minimized any goodwill that might have helped overcome people's reluctance to deny such an obvious talent their place in the Hall.

.

Does this count as making a mockery of the game?