Jump to content

Thunderheads

Administrators
  • Content Count

    12,779
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    76

Thunderheads last won the day on August 10

Thunderheads had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,700 Excellent

5 Followers

About Thunderheads

  • Rank
    Crew Chief
  • Birthday 02/21/1966

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Northville, MI
  • Interests
    Aside from the obvious, ....sport kiting, astronomy, good jazz, good wine, and hanging out with SWMBO and doing nothing! ;)

Contact Methods

  • Yahoo
    jmetz66

More information about you

  • Your Association Name
    MHSAA
  • Occupation
    Automotive
  • Types/Levels of Baseball called
    High School Varsity
  • How did you hear about Umpire-Empire?
    ABUA (umpire.org)

Recent Profile Visitors

29,193 profile views
  1. thanks .... Yes, ... just when you think to yourself ... "yeah, I know 8-4-1 .... that's when it blows up on you" OR ... you read it through thoroughly and catch something new
  2. OK Thanks Steve, that's what I was thinking .... but threw it out here for a little more discussion ... perfect analogy! THANKS!
  3. It's always good to refresh, so while it's on topic, let's do that as a sanity check: Let's look at 8-4-1 (g) The batter-runner is out when: OK ... so ....the infraction is ignored if it's to avoid a fielder making a play on a batted ball, .... GOT IT. ~OR~ if the act does not interfere with a fielder or throw. NOW - .... wouldn't this include a poor throw to first? BR can't interfere w/ a crap throw (as long as he's not trying to throw around the runner) ... RIGHT? AND, if so .... then it's not 'automatic' when BR is outside the lane (not that I thought it was) but it's interpreted that quality of throw doesn't matter w/ FED. Am I thinking too much here? [opens window and creeps out to the edge and looks down]
  4. Thank you for this .... yeah, I thought "provision" may not be correct here ....should have gone w/ my gut instinct Gil mentions that Wong is 'fine' at the 45 mark, but I noticed he moves back "in" as he gets closer. I was thinking in FED, yes, this is RLI based on Wong's movements. AGREE? ON EDIT: I see the wording/diagram at the bottom of the screen now that you referenced above, ... I'm good!
  5. Quality of throw (QoT) is only a provision in OBR, and NCAA, yes? If I remember correctly, FED does not look at QoT ?? @maven @Senor Azul .......... Thanks!
  6. correct ... Gil talks about (3) and (5) being called, and maybe I read it wrong initially ...but I was just clarifying that because of this situation, (5) was envoked (not both ) ....that's all I was confirming, ....kind of rhetorical I know
  7. so actually, only 6.03 a (5) was enforced here because the batter struck out, correct?
  8. OK ... we're done here. That's enough. @Umpire in Chief ... Warren, if you want to re-open this, then go ahead. This is going nowhere
  9. Ok, there HAD TO BE A REASON the guys behind the fence played this out as a WARNING. Until we know that reason, this discussion will go in circles forever. You've received many alternatives as to possibly why it happened, but again, we'll never know unless we were there, OR if someone here knows who was behind the fences. We understand your point of view, we've given possible reasons why ..... Not sure I want this turning into a beaten dead horse scenario
  10. Yeah ... I noticed 2 other guys pointing ....the rest was some form of a hammer-style. I believe that's what stkjock was trying to say, so that's why I put the - ???
  11. I believe that some of the mechanics either come from, or are shared from softball, but I've noticed it too. There have been a couple guys who have been very solid behind the plate however, and NOT appeared robotic. The mechanic for announcing a "reviewed call" is super silly, but, .... it is what it is ....
×
×
  • Create New...