TheLovejoy

When the DH takes the field, the player that he's DH'ing for, has to come out. He can't re-enter, because he's 'one person' in the same spot in the lineup as the DH. For a JV game, I'm positive both coaches in most jurisdictions would be like, 'yeah, just bat the Right Fielder in the Catchers spot now as some sort of re-entry, all inclusive, get the kids on the field type thing. That's what would happen here. So how would it be handled legally? When the DH goes into the field, F9 becomes an illegal player, and has to remove himself. I believe the shorthanded rule allows you to play with 8. When the catcher position comes up to bat, it's the ol' auto-out.

I mean, kinda...eh? It's legal in some states, as is the delayed-dead ball-balks. I think NFHS has a much more state associated taste with it, whereas entities like American Legion and NCAA have nationwide post-seasons. NFHS is high school athletics. Most high school sports stop at the state level. You might play some regional games during the regular season, but playoff/postseason/state tournament time, are only within your state, and then when it's over, it's done. You don't do anything after that. This allows individual state associations to make-up/adopt/enforce rules that cater to their state, and some may be more progressive than others, or more conservative. Hybrid stance is approved here, partly because American Legion is the dominant entity. This give pitchers less transition between high school baseball, and American Legion season. We will probably be one of the next states to adopt the delayed-dead ball-balk rule, for the same reason.

I found a couple like that with the plier-type-tool included, and I thought that might be easier to get fastened. Loxx makes a really cool 'lockable-quick-release' button. But it's like, $15/button. So, I'd need 4 of them, to incrase the price of my shoes by $60 🤦‍♂️ LOXX® Fastener Set, Black Plate, Solid Brass - Buckleguy.com That release button sticks up just a tad further than I'd like. However, I like the old SSK shoes with the Dragon Spikes :shrug

@MadMax Amazon.com: BetterJonny 24 Sets Heavy Duty Leather Snap Fasteners Kit, 17mm Metal Snap Buttons Press Studs Leather Rivets Snaps with 4 Setter Tools for Clothes Bracelet Jackets Jeans (Gun Black) : Arts, Crafts & Sewing I think this is what you mean?

Oh...no....no no.... I typically just take a step or two back after they hit the ball, and put out the vibes for front row moms. Rivet buttons..... love it. This will work until GD comes out with their shoes. Once I find some supplies, I'll get some updates in. I know less about handyman crafty work than I'd like to admit. I'll do some research on this one so I don't have to hear from TMiB about school shortcuts.

Guys....(and gals).... This is an embarrassing post that I can only make with the anonymity of an online forum... I don't know how to tie my shoes. I'm not joking... I used the SSK Velcros for a couple years, and the New Balance hidden shoelace pouch for a couple years as well. It's been...maybe 6 or 7 years since I've had to actually tie normal plate shoes and figure out how to hide the laces, or the procedure for tieing them. So, instead of learning...I want to come up with other fun solutions. 🤷‍♂️ One is to grab some epoxy, and place a couple of buttons under the metatarsal flap. One on the inside of the foot, and one on the outside. So I can tie the shoe, and button the flap down. I'm not positive which epoxy/button combo would work on the outside leather of the shoe, and the underside of the fabric of the metatarsal flap. Thoughts? The other is doing the same thing with some type of industrial strength magnets. I'm a bit fearful of the weight that 4 strong magnets would add to the shoe. These are pretty light, so I'm not terribly concerned, but I think the buttons might be a better option. My fear of that is if the shoe gets hit hard enough, could it bend the button? Then who knows if it will ever unbutton or button together again. Anyways...ideas? Where my fingers are is roughly where I'd put the button. One on the inside of the metatarsal flap, and one on the shoe itself.

I’ve been instructed at my local association level to work up the 1st base line to watch the FPSR, and once we get a good look at the slide, to turn to 1st to help with the pull. The problem is the timing—slides into 2nd take longer, while the double play turn at 1st happens so quickly that we’re still locked in on the runner at 2nd while the 1st baseman is already receiving the throw, often without anyone truly focused on the pulled foot. Their philosophy is to only rotate to 3rd on balls out of the infield—always. Since this stays in the infield, it’s left entirely to the BU. That said, I’ve had instruction from a couple of sources I trust more—including one of the old pro guys who runs the AP Western States clinic, along with another instructional clinic—that teaches rotating to 3rd while still picking up the FPSR. That allows U1 to stay in a B position shaded toward 1st, giving him the best angle on the play at 1st. It also keeps the PU in position for a potential play at 3rd if the runner is safe at 2nd. It’s frustrating, because I end up working it one way for my local association and a completely different way when I’m doing semi-local college or summer wood bat league games. As for the play itself, I’m generally under the impression that intentional contact in any form is illegal under NFHS rules. Trying to draw a foul by initiating contact is still intentional contact. There’s a clear difference between not getting out of the way—or simply being in the way—and actively moving into contact. In my opinion, that warrants at least a warning to both the player and the coach.

This is how it is for American Legion Baseball games. During the regular season, they allow Re-Entry, courtesy runners for pitcher/catcher, 15 after 3 run rule....then once post-season comes...they go straight OBR rules (with a 10 after5). So, the regional, state, super regionals, all have different rules than what they've been playing all year. I do indeed address these differences at the plate meeting for post-season.

I saw @wolfe_man say that, and I just assumed he'd read it wrong and it meant runners at 2nd and 3rd. I legit didn't know that used-to-could mean runners at 1st and 2nd.

In note form, nothing official if your state does something different from NFHS, this is what I'd have to enforce: -This would count as 2 appearances. -They can't make more than 2 appearances in a 3 day period regardless of pitch count. -They can pitch in another game the same day if under 31 pitches for the first game. -Umpires aren't responsible for pitch counts, but are responsible for enforcing penalties if it's pointed out. -Opposing team faces a penalty if they 'game' the system by letting a player go over the pitch count, and then calling the pitching team out on it. (It's a safety issue for the player, so anybody knowingly letting it happen is held accountable as well)

Guys.... I"m sorry....I'm so confused here.... He said runners on 2nd and 3rd... What is all of this talk about bunting infield flys or a runner on first? You can't have an intentionally dropped ball if there is no force out applicable.

I was taught it should be a 'safe' signal, then just leaving the right arm out. A guy from the AP Western States clinic joked with us saying it developed from a safe signal, to just leaving the right hand out signaling that he was only 'half safe' at that point. It made us chuckle.

I might quote it wrong, but I think on like the first or second page of the NFHS 2026 case book, it says first time is a team warning, second time is an ejection. Edit: I think I lied. I cannot find it in the case book anywhere. I'm not sure where I read this, but I explicitly remember seeing this for an NFHS case play, or example.

I view everything he does before he raises his hands as part of him gathering himself on the rubber, not as him already having fully assumed his pitching position. We see this all the time with pitchers who step onto the rubber with the ball still in the glove, then remove the ball with the bare hand, lean forward, look in, and get their sign. Technically, yes — they are already in contact with the rubber while doing that. But nobody is calling that an illegal pitch or a balk unless those actions become separate, distinct, and create something deceptive or improper. That is how I’m viewing this play. To me, he steps onto the rubber while the batter is still getting ready, and all of that movement beforehand is just part of him getting settled. Once the batter fully engages him, that is when he brings his hands up and actually assumes what I would consider his windup starting position. That is the key piece for me: I do not believe he has actually addressed the rubber in his windup position until he lifts his hands. Because of that, I do not have an illegal pitch here. Maybe others see it differently, but from my standpoint, there is not enough there for me to rule that he has legally established one position and then violated it. I’m treating the earlier movement as part of his natural gather, not as the start of a legally fixed pitching position. Edit: cleaned up my confusing wording a bit. I think.

I see it now. I was wrong. I thought the entire thing was just upside down, and you were overthinking it. You'll have to pull the buckles off the straps and flip them around.

I think it's just upside down homie....

If I recall PU is supposed to stay home if it isn't 'behind/beside' him. PU has it up to the dugout basically. U1 comes in and takes the dugout/fence/dbt since it's a foul ball, and there is no possibility of a play at 1st base.

You're probably not wrong, but did you search them ALL??? Perhaps I was over-simplifying it, or trying to hard to find a reason to 'justify' it. I just mean, we have a rule, that states 'if beyond first base, then it's penalized at the time of the interference'. We have a rule that tells us to do that. And here we are, saying, "I'm not going to enforce that rule because I don't believe in it. Instead, I'm not scoring the run." In person, in a game, I absolutely would do that, and not score the run. 100% Do remember Richvee, I'm in favor of not counting the run. I'm just pointing out some Devils advocate thing, double standards, common sense, whatever you wanna call it. You're right that it would probably need to happen on a big stage where rules committees would need to see it in action, and finish the sentence at the end of the rule: "unless it allows a run to score", or something.

I've been using Football Down indicators for a few years now. Same thing, except I won't end up as a red dot on a map if I hang out too long in the little girls section trying to decide between My Little Pony and Barbie hair ties, then asking store workers which one look better around my wrists. EDIT: No shade to good dads who shop for their girls.

So....I purchased the 'Universal Davis' pads, because they come with a patch. The other pads (the Cloud4's which I purchased for my two Davis Mirages), don't come with the patch. I took the patch off of the Universal, and put it on my current setup. It's that sexy.

Yes, of course. I thought this was an NFHS conversation for some reason. But looking back I realize it wasn't directed that way, but that is what I meant referencing that. Sorry for that generalized argument. I do appreciate you knowing 'what I mean', haha, instead of taking it literal and technical by the words I use. You must be married and have practice with that.

Literally common sense tells me that if the pitcher balks on his pickoff to 1st, and overthrows the first baseman down the line, and the runner makes it to 3rd, I should let him stay at 3rd. But the rule says it's a dead ball, and he stays at 2nd. I'm not here to enforce common sense. I'm here to enforce the rules as they are written. When Common Sense starts writing the rules, I'll start enforcing them that way.

For absolute clarification, I'm not a purist, and all those saying that we 'should not allow the run to score', I'm in the same boat. That it isn't the spirit of the rule, and we don't want them to interfere on purpose to allow the run to score. My comment was just that, we've always had everybody on this forum saying, "I'm obligated to rule it as written, and not based on my personal opinion." And now, we're like...'buuuuuuut, in this case, I can do it because I don't like the ruling.' To answer you: Yes. I score the run since it happened after the interference, as the rule and penalty are written. However, with 'Intentional Interference', I think we can establish that it was done in order to change another outcome. I'd reference one of the scenarios where intentional interference actually calls out the runner closest to home, as a bigger penalty. In this case, to maximize the penalty, you know it was done to allow a run to score, you have to call the runner, 'who already scored?' out, because the intentional interference was done just for that.

The first step....you know...

I would agree with this, except there are 4,863 other threads in this forum where all of us admit, 'I don't like the rule. But, it's not my job to like it; It's my job to enforce it.' So, if we start making exceptions to situations based on common sense, am I allowed to just wave a balk off if it didn't affect the play, or let a FPSR at 2b go because the runner was out at 1st anyways, and the runner on 3rd scored? I just mean, THIS is the one, out of all of the others, where we are allowed to change a ruling based on spirit of the rule, and not what the book says?