oswalmar

Gracias Matt!, thanks Matt! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hi! I have a doubt: If 3rd out is made on appeal play (R1 or R2 on 2nd base), can the defense team - after this appeal - choice another appeal play to look a 4th out and void the run (R3 on 3rd base)?

I just wanted make an exercise, but selected the wrong play. Thanks Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Beyond the comments pro and contrary to the position of Drake, I think a play like this could happen to any of us commenting on here. The colleague Drake (I say colleague because he is an umpire, beyond he is MLBU) called "safe" despite that catcher touched him first and pulled it out of balance (almost falling). He made interference. The fielder is on the field to make plays and may make its by where believe needed, right or reversed, we must keep a safe distance. Question: It couldn't be better raise the hands, call "timeout" and award the 3rd base? Or was it better to leave everything as it happened. I would like to read your opinions. Again, is just an exercise. Could happen to anyone of us...

my poor english management... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

That is correct, sorry (is not me, is my spanglish, LOL). DH is removed, no out. S3 for DH (B3) before any play. I think this is better... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

F1 batting was an unannounced termination of the DH(B2) coming to the plate when he did was a BOO. But that BOO was negated by the next pitch to B1 (now also a BOO). But that BOO is also negated by the next pitch to DH (an illegal sub for B2/F1). Though the rules only say this is illegal and don't prescribe a remedy, calling DH out seems the logical thing to do, but who is the proper batter now? This is not a BOO where the proper batter is out, this is an illegal sub. Is B2 (F1 standing on 3B) the next proper batter?... What a mess. I think that's generally how I'd handle it. The first pitch to the "DH" legitimizes B1's at bat. So, B2 (who was the DH and is now the former F1) is due up. He's on base though, so he is skipped. That makes B3 the proper batter. When DH shows up, he's an illegal sub for B3. The hit stands (actions by an illegal sub are still valid under OBR), but B3 is now out of the game, the DH is out of the game. Put a legal sub for B3 on first and B4 bats. The batting order is now B1, B2 =(old F1), S3, B4, B5 ... I like this solution. Especially since it is supported by Rule 3.03 which, I must confess, I had not thoroughly reviewed. Now if the umpire is aware of what is occurring, could to stop the DH and inform to manager that he ended his acting in the game. The umpire must intervene before he is positioned in box and to call to bat the proper (B3) to prevent the out of both. Do not you think? ... and would also prevent something like what illustrates ricka56

F1 batting was an unannounced termination of the DH(B2) coming to the plate when he did was a BOO. But that BOO was negated by the next pitch to B1 (now also a BOO). But that BOO is also negated by the next pitch to DH (an illegal sub for B2/F1). Though the rules only say this is illegal and don't prescribe a remedy, calling DH out seems the logical thing to do, but who is the proper batter now? This is not a BOO where the proper batter is out, this is an illegal sub. Is B2 (F1 standing on 3B) the next proper batter?... What a mess. I think that's generally how I'd handle it. The first pitch to the "DH" legitimizes B1's at bat. So, B2 (who was the DH and is now the former F1) is due up. He's on base though, so he is skipped. That makes B3 the proper batter. When DH shows up, he's an illegal sub for B3. The hit stands (actions by an illegal sub are still valid under OBR), but B3 is now out of the game, the DH is out of the game. Put a legal sub for B3 on first and B4 bats. The batting order is now B1, B2 =(old F1), S3, B4, B5 ... I like this solution. Especially since it is supported by Rule 3.03 which, I must confess, I had not thoroughly reviewed. Now if the umpire is aware of what is occurring, could to stop the DH and inform to manager that he ended his acting in the game. The umpire must intervene before he is positioned in box and to call to bat the proper (B3) to prevent the out of both. Do not you think?

F1 batting was an unannounced termination of the DH(B2) coming to the plate when he did was a BOO. But that BOO was negated by the next pitch to B1 (now also a BOO). But that BOO is also negated by the next pitch to DH (an illegal sub for B2/F1). So who is the proper batter now? This is not a BOO where the proper batter is out, Is B2 (F1 standing on 3B) the next proper batter?... What a mess. Notice: DH is B2, not B3...

Very hard situation. Reading the comments, it seems quite reasonable to let the actions continue and wait for this team go to the defense. In this moment would be clarified waters. But the problem could persist if they make the appeal later that both DH and pitcher are on the bases and have made a pitch to the B3...

I regret not having fully explained my question. In the previous post I reported that there is no special regulation that allows 10 players at bat. Can only bat 9. My question still focused where this. The 6.10 Rule (OBR) says, in one of its sections, that when the pitcher enters by any player other than the DH, this action ends with the DH for the rest of the game. And another section says that the pitcher can only enter to bat for the DH. I think the first section is concerned when the pitcher goes to another defensive position, but does say nothing when this suititución is made ​​in the moment that team is hitting. If a manager can do this and both, pitcher and DH can staying in the same time on base, is not mocking the established in the Rules?

Friends, thank you for your opinion. First I inform you that, in Venezuela we work under the OBR without any modification regarding to the DH. Based on this principle, I think this is one of many situations that are not entirely clear in the OBR and must be resolved by us, the umpires, using analogies. I would want to discuss this extensively and come ultimately to a decision (or opinion) approved. Now, if the pitcher takes a turn at bat of the 1st in the lineup, can be understood as that, apart from being a unannounced replacement of the DH also is a Batting Out ​​of Turn (Rule 6.07). As I interpret the Rule 6.10 (b) (10), so must be. I am persuaded the pitcher is not allowed to enter to bat for any player other than the DH. If I am wrong and he can do it, I like to know where I find that comment, because in the OBR is not explicitly. If so, things would change, not for the DH, but yes to the pitcher and the rest of the players.

Excuse me everybody, BD is DH. Sorry

Excuse me BD is DH. Sorry

In a lineup card with BD, once the battery turns around, the pitcher -placed in tenth place in the lineup- takes the turn before for the first batter and reached first base hitting to left. The first batter occupied the batter box after the pitcher and got walk. The BD, which is as second batter, stops in batter box, bunt the ball and reaches safe to first base. Bases loaded. My question is: should I, as umpire, to prevent that the BD consume the turn, as he was replaced by the pitcher and therefore is now officially out of the game? or I should await the defensive team makes the claim to bring the situation in order?

Thanks to all colleagues who responded. Just wanted to share with you this situation that, from the beginning for me, was totally clear. Basically, the colleagues who worked the afore mentioned game, have differences of interpretation between Rule 4.09 (a) and 4.09 (b). One of their (U1) argues that the rule 4.09 (b) is not explicit about the requirement of other runners in reach next bases to validate the run, and therefore enforced this rule and not the 4.09 (a), without realizing it, from my point of view, that is a different situation from that stated at the 4.09 (b). 4.09 (a): plays in motion (certainly C1 did not reach 2nd base); 4.09 (b) BB with bases loaded (players protected until the next base).

Hi guys! Baseball (OBR): Extrainning, 2 OUTS, GAME TIED, BOTTOM OF THE INNING 11, R1, R2. The Batter (B) hits between CF and RF, the R2 scores easily, the R1 stops his run and returns to congratulate the BR after he reached first base. The visiting team saw that the R1 not stepped on second and made the appeal on that base. The U2 called the runner out (3rd forced out, the run is void). The U1 said the appeal is not admissible in this situation and awarded (to valid) the run. Who is right? What do you think?

Yep. And if the DC goes ape-crazy, "sorry coach, I was watching home to ensure that the runner touched the plate" Ja,ja,ja. Big problem! I'm according with you. Without a doubt, I wouldn't want be "in the shoes" of my colleague. At times, enforced the rules, can bring more consequences than benefits. There's an old adage of umpires: "Don't seeing all, don't hearing all"...

Hi! A colleague asked me a question that, sincerely, made ​​me doubt his decision. Situation: Bases loaded, two outs. The pitcher gives BB to BR and all runners should advance to next base. The 3rd base run leaves the defensive team on the field. The BR begins to celebrate with their patners without reaching the 1st base. The 1st base coach, seeing that did not quite reach the base, grabbed his arm and took him to her. The umpires call it the BR out for the coach interference. Like the BR was out before get the 1st base, 3rd run is voided (third out on the BR before 1st base). I'm not sure this decision. What do you think?

Ultimately, and now cleared the confusion created by me, I think exists unity of criteria that the R1 only can be put out if it is tagged with the ball off 1B.

It is difficult to communicate in a second language so I'm not completely sure what you are saying. If the runner reached second base before the pitcher made any motion in any way related to delivering a pitch then the runner is considered to be at second base and it is not a tag appeal. If the pitcher made any motion at all that is part of delivering a pitch before the runner reached second base then it is a failure to tag appeal. It does not seem reasonable that a pitcher would just stand motionless and let the runner go to second base, so I'm having a hard time with this. Is that what really happened? Guys, I apologize for the "rabbits" that I placed in my comments. That happens to all who does not handle a language with complete ease. I promise that in future try to use the right terms when making my comments. That's right, it is better to say "Step Off" than "Detaches".Thank you. Yes, it did. Very rare. But the pitcher let the R1 reach 2B without doing anything about it and then the R1 at firstwrongly return, causing the throw to the 1B.

It is difficult to communicate in a second language so I'm not completely sure what you are saying. If the runner reached second base before the pitcher made any motion in any way related to delivering a pitch then the runner is considered to be at second base and it is not a tag appeal. If the pitcher made any motion at all that is part of delivering a pitch before the runner reached second base then it is a failure to tag appeal. It does not seem reasonable that a pitcher would just stand motionless and let the runner go to second base, so I'm having a hard time with this. Is that what really happened? That was what really happened. It is a rare and unusual case, happened in a baseball game amateur class (or level) "A". The runner reached second base without the pitcher step off. And then, once catched the fly, instead of staying at second base, he returned to first base.

Gentlemen, I apologize for the inappropriate use of some terms. Indeed, English is my second language and I not handling it with complete ease and support my syntax with translation software. I appreciate your comprehension in this regard. Also promise to leave familiar with the appropriate terms. With respect to the word "detach" and "step of" is more appropriate to the second definition. Thank you.

The fact is he returned and his action probably caused the play in 1B.