UAME

I love my Davis Shins, with the exception of this issue. It's now second nature to pull my pants out when they get clamped. @wolfe_man based on your comments, I'm guessing you don't have firsthand experience specifically with the Davis design? The DavisShins are essentially a rigid design from top to bottom. Yes, there is a separate "knee cap" but it barely hinges at the joint. The only straps are behind your calf; nothing above the bend of the knee. When you squat, the shin guard (down the entire height) is fighting to be vertical (or on plane with your shin bone.) This pulls the knee cover away from your quad as you squat; only the tension in your pantleg resists the rigid knee cap from standing straight up. The gap created between the guard and the front of your thigh closes up when you stand from your stance, thus creating the "chomp" effect that gathers the pant material that was spanning the gap. Any methods that might work on standard designed guards are pretty futile on the DavisShins. Duct tape? Yes, if you can call balls and strikes with your knees locked completely straight!! 😆

I can only speak to my experience with the Adams XV and moving to the Davis D3O, and will explain it this way: The Adams was a rigid plate system with D3O pads mounted to the inside. The Davis is a D3O pad system with plates mounted on the outside. That's the best way I can say it. The harness design doesn't seem particularly special. But when you get the harness adjusted properly, the protector is "clinging" to you. I tried limited heating, bending of the XV, but it never held my desired shape no matter how much I tightened the harness.

THIS. UN-intentional is (among myriad scenarios) the ball bouncing up and off the bat again. A tantrum (no matter how docile or unruly) is laden with intent.

Sorry, obviously this is (at best) a secondhand retelling... I don't know what the coach said, but I think it is safe to presume that the umpire knew the DH was entering the game on defense at catcher... it was the middle of a latter inning. Regardless WHAT was said, the lineup was incorrectly administered. Anyone can say it should/would never happen under their watch. I was more curious as to HOW people would fix it, if it were brought to your attention in the offensive half of the inning as stated in the OP.

I moved from the Adams (Schutt) XV to the Davis D3O this season. Over the weekend, I took my worst shot of the year: a tipped ~80mph fastball right over the catcher and into my right pectoral. POP! "Ooooohs" from the stands; "Walk it out, walk it out to the mound.." from the defensive head coach to his F2. Me: "I'm fine, let's play." F2: "That sounded VERY bad!" Me: "It's pro level gear. That's why I spend $250 on a protector." I literally felt nothing but a shove. No pain, no aftereffects. To be fair, the Adams XV was always great in this regard, too. However, the Davis is pliable. It hugs your torso and lays tight to the body at every point. No jostling or rigid plates rubbing uncomfortably when you're sprinting out on a rotation.

A head coach that lives in my neighborhood contacted me over the weekend about this scenario that happened during a game outside of our umpiring district (ie, I didn't know the crew): Home team lineup includes: Smith as F2, batting 2nd. Jones is DH batting 3rd for RF Evans. In the top of the inning, following multiple errors by Smith, Home HC makes a defensive substitution by declaring to the UIC "I'm killing the DH." and sends Jones in to catch (removing Smith from the field and Evans remaining in RF.) No substitution is announced to Visitor HC (and no one realizes or objects) and the half inning eventually ends. During the bottom of the inning, Smith's spot in the order is set to lead off, so Home team sends a new sub, Baker, to the plate to bat in the 2nd spot. Former DH (and now F2) Jones is on deck, planning to bat in his correct 3rd spot in the order. Visitor HC realizes the illegal swap and appeals to the umpire. How would you fix this at this point? To me, the "illegal" participant is Evans in RF (who should have come off the field when the DH Jones assumed a defensive position.) Evans no longer has a "spot" as a participant in the lineup, which reverted to 9-man when the DH took the field. Obviously, it is too late to reverse any actions that occurred in the previous half inning with the illegal defensive sub. Would you declare Smith (or Baker?) OUT in the 2nd spot in the lineup and proceed to Jones batting with 1 Out? Or, permit Baker to bat with the understanding that he (or another new sub) will need to take the field defensively in the next inning, with RF Evans being declared illegal (and now restricted to the bench for the remainder of the game)?? Any reasoning where you would consider DH (now F2) Jones to be considered the illegal sub?

In the moment, I did what you described, leave R1 alone and score R2. But, when you begin saying "what would have happened" without Obstruction, we could have easily (had defense applied the tags) had R2 safe back at 3B and R1 out for occupying a base he didn't have a right to.

By this statement, did you mean that "Due to the minimum award that will soon be granted by the umpire, R2 will not be sent back to 3B"? Because, that's where he was going and without the obstruction that's still where he was going (back to 3B.) I was the Plate Umpire in this situation, and once I had obstruction I mentally thought to myself, "OK, R2 is getting home no matter what." At that point, I really never considered the possibility of having an out (on R1) because he was camped on the base. In discussing this within our association later, someone argued that if both runners were tagged while on the base (the delayed dead ball hasn't been called yet) that we should have R1 Out and then score R2 on the minimum award.

NFHS R2 attempting to score on hit to the outfield, gets caught in a rundown between 3B and home. R2 is eventually obstructed by F5 without the ball as R2 is retreating to 3B. During the rundown, R1 has arrived and is standing on 3B. Plate Umpire calls and signals "That's obstruction!", the subsequent throw to 3B is mishandled but regathered in proximity to the base such that neither R2 nor R1 attempt to leave the base. The defense never attempts to tag either runner (presumably due to hearing the earlier call of "Obstruction".) Base umpire calls "Time", crew comes together and awards R2 home and leaves R1 on 3B. Following the "Obstruction" call, if R1 had been tagged while standing on 3B, he would have been Out for occupying a base that he doesn't have a right to (yet), correct? When would R1 gain the right to that base? ...only if R2 scores during live ball action following the Obstruction? Did the crew incorrectly bail out R1 by calling Time prematurely while he was still in jeopardy of being retired?? Or once it became apparent that the defense wasn't going to immediately tag either runner, is it appropriate to kill the play?

Had my first one yesterday. We had been verbally instructed by a state regional director that we'd be justified in immediate ejection (same as drawing a line.) However, the game was nearing completion and I chose to warn the head coach and let him handle it. I doubt 90% of the people in attendance witnessed it (or understood it if they did see), as the batter was already about 3 steps from his dugout (after taking called strike 3) and was doing it for laughs from his teammates rather than showing me up at home plate.

For a plate meeting with the coaches, there's no need to cover any of the things you mentioned. First round playoff games have as good (or higher) chance of being mercy-ruled than regular games and require the same game management skills (ie., EXPANDING the zone, when appropriate) as any everyday game. I hope we are all officiating balk rules the same in the regular season as we are the playoffs, or we're doing a disservice to be springing a penalty on pitchers during an elimination game that we haven't called all year because those games "didn't matter." That said, I DO add this statement to my "sportsmanship" sentence during the playoffs: "Coaches, we expect the standard for sportsmanship to be upheld by the men standing around this plate. These young men will have extra adrenaline and testosterone flowing in what for some of them will be the last time they ever get to play this great game. Let's help them handle those emotions, respect the opponent and respect the game of baseball. Good luck!"

I'm going to have to paraphrase this question, as I'm not going to retake the exam just to get it exactly right: R2 & R3, no outs. The batter attempts a bunt and pops up to the pitcher, who intentionally drops it: a) ball is immediately dead (the answer did NOT include a statement that the batter would be declared Out) b) ball is alive and in play c) blah blah blah d) blah blah blah a & b were the only viable options, I'm quite sure. Before answering, my gut told me that I would have officiated this as option b) as first base was open (no force situation) there would be no advantage gained by intentionally dropping the pop up. 5-1-1j states "an infielder intentionally drops a fair fly, line drive, or bunt in flight with at least first base occupied and less than two outs." Case play 5.1.1 M has an R1, but concludes with this blanket statement: "The ball becomes dead immediately when it is intentionally dropped by and infielder except in the case of an infield fly." Against my instincts, I ultimately landed on answer a) due to that sentence in the case play, plus the "AT LEAST" phrase in 5-1-1j. (Is R2 + R3 not MORE - at least - than R1?)

NFHS Example Situations: Play 1: R2, 2 Outs. Batter hits to outfield, R2 obstructed by F5 rounding 3B. BR thrown out trying to advance to 2B prior to R2 being able to reach home plate. Play 2: R1, 2 Outs. Batter hits to outfield, R1 is obstructed by F6 near 2B, but has already rounded 3B when BR is retired behind him at 2B. [What I'm asking with these 2 plays is if there is a difference WHERE the runner was obstructed by a fielder (either F5 tripping R2 or F6 tripping R1) and the runner spends the exact same amount of time on the ground/recovering from the fall, but has ultimately advanced to between 3B and home when the time-play out is recorded on BR behind him.] Play 3: R1/R2, 2 Outs. Hit to OF, relay throw comes in to cutoff man as R2 is rounding 3B. R2 decides he can't score and throws on the brakes, but gets caught in a pickle/rundown, and is eventually obstructed by a fielder without the ball. Immediately following the obstruction, F2 throws to F5 where R1 is tagged having arrived at 3B during the duration of the rundown. In all of these plays, are we justified in scoring the lead runner and ending the inning on the out that was recorded behind them? With Obstruction awards being "umpire judgement" on where a runner would have advanced had obstruction not occurred, how much liberty should we exercise in "fast forwarding" an obstructed runner to home with a subsequent third out ending the inning? Does the NFHS mandate(8-3-2) to "award the obstructed runner a minimum of one base beyond the runner's position on base when the obstruction occurred" impact how this is administered versus other rule sets?

@BigBlue4u If you haven't picked up on it, I'm not trying to justify my decision. Here are the best explanations to your question that I offered in hindsight:

I appreciate what you're saying, but I do know the conditions for leaving the box legally. The 3-0 pitch was a wild pitch, so IF the batter requested time to step out I would have ignored it (meaning that I wouldn't have held up my hands and declared "Time!")