noumpere

The rule supports calling it a balk. I'm not arguing that. The case play also allows not calling it a balk or calling it a balk based on umpire judgement. If you are using common sense to not balk the pitcher taking the rubber and going to his glove for the ball then I think you can use common sense to not call this a balk. You missed the "if these movements of the arms and legs are not associated with the pitch" part of the ruling. Separating the hands is by definition the start of the pitch. See 2-28-3 "any movement of the arms or legs... with hands already together"

Why OBS and not INT for the CI? Because it's FED and in FED it's called "Catcher's Obstruction." (The defense always obstructs)

The case play by sdix supports calling it a balk

I agree with all of that, and with the others that if F1 is looking in for the sign with the hands together then separating them is a balk under any code.

Under any code, if the ball has already been thrown and then theres OBS and the thrown ball goes OOP, the runner will get two bases, even if the OBS "award" would only be one base.

I would just add that while a quality throw is not required, the batter-runner still needs to be approximately between the fielder and F3. So in your play with a fair bunt if BR had been running in FOUL territory and it was a bad throw, no RLI.

I agree with the above. But what do you do if the ball was caught and R1/R2 successfully returns to first? do you leave him there? Do you send him to second? Do you stand around and not let F1 pitch until someone figures it out? Do over? Maybe this goes on the "Get ready for the season" threads and whatever the next play is.

I know that we're not supposed to say, but if R3 touched HP, and DHC comes out and asks, I'll nod (yes, he touched HP). If he touched HP and I refuse to answer and the defense goes through the motion of a (to be denied) appeal, best case, DHC thinks I'm F'g with him and makes life miserable for me the remainder of the game. Worse case, they screw up the (to be denied) appeal and other runners advance..now I really have hell to pay. I know that mess-up would be their fault, but I have made a game management decision to expeditite the process. Then your taking an opportunity away from the offense and if I was the other coach Id be mad as heck about it. Now if there are no runners then maybe you can get away with it.

I think the point on this is one that a friend of mine makes: You cant always be in the best possible position, so be in the best position possible. Bumper sticker (unless it already is one of course)

The player involved was a pitcher for the home team. The game was suspended after the top of the inning with the score tied. The player then entered the game for the Visitors in the bottom of the inning (when the game was resumed) and gave up some runs. Since he was still the pitcher of record for the home team, he was both the winning pitcher and the losing pitcher in the same game. ...wait -- don't read this until April 1.

right. and the other thing to remember is that "batting out of order" or "boo" is wrong. it should be "mytab" -- "missing your turn at bat" because that's who is out. If you remember those two things, you'll get these plays right.

You missed the very important first clause in that rule: Prior to accumulating three charged conferences in seven innings or less, a conference is not charged if the pitcher is removed as pitcher.

translation: You caught us cheating but I have to make it look good for the fans.

It was of course a balk but if R1 and R2 were running and reached the next base, then maybe it was ruled a balk but was just so lokey that some didn't notice. You probably don't need to make a big deal about this at the college level. Just give the new count (same oas theold count) before the next pitch so everyone knows.

Johh, Im not allowed to answer that and youll have to appeal to find out. Oh, and they can still appeal R3 and can do it by making it obvious why they are touching the plate.

they can and they have. Note that by "move" I don't mean go to the offender themselves but have game management do it.

You might find that this just makes the problem worse. See, new umpires sign up, then they have to work alone. They make mistakes (or heck, even get it right but a newer coach at that level thinks they got it wrong)and get yelled at and have no one to help them out or even commiserate with them in the parking lot. So, they quit. So now you have less umpires again.

I agree with Rich on the ruling and don't understand the two posts prior to that. I don't think it makes a difference which code is being used nor do I think it matters which batter they are appealing. It might not be a dumb move by the manager though, depending on who batters B1, B2 and B3 are and who the manager would rather have at the plate.

If the coach doesn't do anything silly, it's easy. But, it's also very flexible and when the coach tries to use that flexibility, it's very confusing.

Ther's a reason to take it off with the left hand. theres no good reason why it matters what hand you use to put it back on. For me, Im working on two things: Plate work and Base work.

Why did you EJ him? and why did you then not do the paperwork?

You can have one player be both P and DH. You can go from a 9-man lineup to a 10- back to a 9 (and vice versa). It takes 3 or 4 pages in the NCAA book -- which is available on line so you can check it out

At less-than-mens league levels, tell the player to knock it off. Get the coach involved if you need to. At mens league and pro, leave it alone and let them police it. Maybe if the catcher says something tell him to address it correctly and only to the level of the crime.

On point 1, its enforced in college -- but 20 seconds is an unbelievably long time in this situation, so maybe that's what you meant, not that you wouldn't enforce it. Secondly, read it like this with the parenthesis added: and with his entire pivot foot (in contact with or directly in front of and parallel the pitcher's plate)

Hey, if the female umpires want to look at the LL Dad in short-shorts and a tank top, that's okay with me.