Is this cheating?

[Mr Umpire]

Funnier still (in a sad way) how guilty minds jump right to their own defense, even when they weren't specifically mentioned.

I get it. I'll try to be wrong on the next debate for you. No problem.

Nothing guilty about it. Matter of timing and past events and recent attitude involving other threads. I am going to have to quit again before this thread gets even further off topic.

[Mr Umpire]

Respectfully disagree.

The runner's next base is second. In my interpretation of the rule, he is "obviously abandoning his effort to touch t he next base." The next base would be second, if he goes to third, he obviously isn't going to second

He's out on my field.

I don't mean to cause a ruckus, but that's the way I read it.

Then, the ruling would be wrong. No official interpretation supports this ruling. If protested and it is a decent BoD that bother learning/finding the proper rulings, the protest should be upheld. This is not a matter of judgment. It is a misapplication of the rules.

I can only ask that you don't rule this way. It is not correct. No rule supports it b/c of the official interpretations.

[kcfan102]

Ok, I see that I'm wrong here. I'm man enough to admit that. It's like A bazillion to one but...

I don't see why. Please help me understand, if you will.

I read in 7.08 about the abandoning baseline. I have a hard time thinking that if I'm in the field, and I see RI take off towards third base that I'm gonna think "Oh, he just gonna bypass second and go straight to third".

First, I'm gonna make sure I know what I'm seeing, and if I see a runner just run off first base in the direction of third (third base dugout for all I know), my instinct will be to pull the "abandoning baseline" rule. I feel like I am 100% justified there.

But then.... I read responses to my posts and think... hmm well, maybe I feel like 3% justified.

Am I reading 7.08 wrong and/or misapplying 7.10? I understand passing a base is considered touching it until caught by the defense. But I guess I always thought that if the runner was in the neighborhood that the appeal is necessary.

7.10 also makes sense. I would feel 100% justified making that argument too... because, on his way to third he just blows by second base. Makes sense.

I guess what I am getting at...

Why, in this situation, is 7.10 so right and 7.08 so wrong.

PS- Sorry for taking the moral aspect of this thread.

Fire away:FIRE:

[ukce1861]

Question for you. Those of you who think this is wrong, what do you think about the situation I saw in another post here. As I recall, it was runner misses 2nd, ends up at 3rd. Defense throws to 3rd, to appeal his miss of 2nd. Coach knows he missed 2nd, so he sends the runner home, hoping the defense will play on the runner, thus losing their right to appeal. Is that cheating too? I'm inclined to look at this post as cheating, yet that situation as "good coaching" but the more I think about it, aren't they the same thing?

[Mr Umpire]

Question for you. Those of you who think this is wrong, what do you think about the situation I saw in another post here. As I recall, it was runner misses 2nd, ends up at 3rd. Defense throws to 3rd, to appeal his miss of 2nd. Coach knows he missed 2nd, so he sends the runner home, hoping the defense will play on the runner, thus losing their right to appeal. Is that cheating too? I'm inclined to look at this post as cheating, yet that situation as "good coaching" but the more I think about it, aren't they the same thing?

But, they are all within the rules. Neither one is cheating. Both are within the rules of baseball. Some believe FED and NCAA have the better ruling for that situation. I don't agree or disagree. They are what they are.

This may not be "good coaching" in this thread. But, that isn't for me to decide, especially as an umpire.

[Mr Umpire]

First off, look at 7.08(a)Comment. It says "the act of the runner to be considered abandoning his efforts to run the bases". It doesn't say anything about the "next" base like 7.08(a)(2). It is little things like this that requires obtaining additional material to understand these confounded baseball rules. Subtle changes in wording can make a huge difference and many of us look right over them. I have.

Second, 7.08(i) specifically refers to running the bases in reverse order as a "travesty of the game". Again, it matters how one reads the rule. And, the official interps read it as that. Also, it helps to know why a rule was written. This rule was written b/c a player did it after hitting a HR if I remember that part correctly. When he did that, the rule was written to prevent it.

Thirdly, there are so many errors in the OBR that an umpire has to get additional material. The rules do so much "double talking" and make it difficult to read. Also, they are not laid out very well so one has to jump from 1 section to the next to get an entire ruling.

While this is a stretch of "acquiring a base when passed", it is the only one which fits. B/c it doesn't say how close a runner has to be to acquire it. Only that he has to pass it while going to another base. He did while heading to 3B. If he went straight to HP and touched it without at least going on the CF side of the mound, then I would say 7.08(i) applies. I would have BR out for passing a preceding runner as well since he will have to in order to get to HP. But, since he went to 3B, he "passed" 2B to get there.

Again, it is the only one which comes close to fitting the situation. Which is why they go to 3B and not HP. There isn't any judgment of if he ran them in reverse or passed a preceding runner.

I hate these bush league tactics. Mainly b/c they make our job tougher to enforce the rules and also, not have to EJ someone b/c of the ruling we have to make.

Edited March 25, 2010 by Mr Umpire

[kcfan102]

Gotcha.

Sometimes I get caught up in what the rule says, rather than what the rule means.

I retract my previous posts and have learned a lesson today.

Thanks guys... now onto some MLB 2K10

[mstaylor]

Sorry, but morals are not a part of umpiring. Though I don't see this as "awesome", I don't agree with it being "cheating". No rule says the runner has to physically touch the bases in order. If that were true, then we'd be calling things similar to SC's FED appeal play. Just call them out as soon as the umpire sees the miss.

No rule has been "circumvented". Once a runner has passed a base, he has acquired that base. If missed and an appeal follows, then the runner shall be called out on appeal. What is "circumvented"? The offense broke no rules or a violation would be called. They played "bush" league tactics but did not violate any rules. This is no different than the "Skunk in the outfield" play.

It is up to the defense to catch it. I do not like it by no means. But, I am not going to label it as "cheating" or "circumventing" the rules b/c it isn't. No violation until caught by the defense. There are at least 9 defensive players. Not my job to worry about what morals the offense is playing by.

Also, why is anyone surprised at what some rats will do? Why is anyone disgusted by it?

Did you miss the part in the rulebook about running the bases in order? A rule has been violated and in a big way. Unfortunately we can't do anything about it unless the defense appeals. The rule you quote about passing a base is the same as touching is not really relevant. If the runner tried to return to first for whatever reason he could not fix his error. That is a gross miss and not fixable.

Now as far as sending his runner on the appeal attempt is allowed by rule and I have problem with kit. The running straight across the infield is patently illegal and should be considered cheating. Pushing the limit of a rule is fine, think pick-off vs balk, but blatantly ignorring a rule is BS.

[Mr Umpire]

Did you miss the part in the rulebook about running the bases in order? A rule has been violated and in a big way. Unfortunately we can't do anything about it unless the defense appeals. The rule you quote about passing a base is the same as touching is not really relevant. If the runner tried to return to first for whatever reason he could not fix his error. That is a gross miss and not fixable.

Now as far as sending his runner on the appeal attempt is allowed by rule and I have problem with kit. The running straight across the infield is patently illegal and should be considered cheating. Pushing the limit of a rule is fine, think pick-off vs balk, but blatantly ignorring a rule is BS.

Again, putting one's own morals in a response as an umpire doesn't work. Also, an umpire's opinion of what is going on has no bearing when on the field. I know this is a forum but I would hope this line of thinking stays off the field.

Also, it is illegal hence being out on appeal. But, the passing is relevant b/c if it weren't, then the umpire would just call him out for any other reason and say "He isn't running the bases". Not true. Until appealed, he is considered to have touched 2B. The only way that will change is if a rule is put in specifically addressing this. Then, it would be a direct violation of the rule and an immediate penalty b/c a rule was broken. Until then, no rule is broken and it is not cheating.

I may not be popular in how I am viewing this. But, I am not approaching it as the "Sheriff of the field". Not even in a forum off the field. I am approaching it as I hope I would on the field. It isn't cheating. It is an illegal act and has penalties. But, there are rules to govern it.

[tjthresh]

Brandon,

Gotta agree w/ump_24 here - you can't make the out call using either of those rules. Just have to wait for the appeal process that's actually in the rules.

tjthresh - I'll try & explain it, since BrianC14 is so disgusted (& I certainly don't blame him) This kind of thing is funny only if done unintentionally. (a la T-Ball)

A kid cheating is bad, but sometimes they don't know better. An adult cheating is worse; they should know by now. An adult teaching a kid to cheat is shameful and wrong. What kind of kid/player are you trying to create? I have no problems with adult coaches and managers teaching their players to take advantage of the other teams (or even the umpires) mistakes, but I have a big problem with them teaching them to circumvent the rules.

Cripes!

I read something on the internet that made me chuckle. Maybe its not awesome. I still think its funny.

I do find it funny the 9 defensive players, defensive coaches, and probably a set of bleechers or two full of on lookers didn't see it either.

I also find it funny that people get so butt hurt about every little thing they read on the internet.

Some of you just need to relax.

[mstaylor]

I should have proofread my post. It should have said that I have no problem with the runner trying for home on the appeal, this is legal and an acceptable baseball play. The cutting across the infield is exactly the opposite. Your position is there is nothing illegal about it because there isn't a rule that says they can't. I pointed out that there was and you ignored it.

The name of the thread is"Is this cheating" so I believe the morality(right or wrong) is part of the question. Obviously we can't enforce something we believe is wrong unless the defense appeals, I think that is clear by most here. However we can certainly discuss how we feel on the play. That happens all the time in different threads and if somebody wants to freelance rules to correct something they don't like, I am one of the first to say how wrong they are.

There are many plays where guys try to bend a rule to fix something they don't like and that is wrong, it happened early in this thread and several explained that it is improper to do. Some examples are Skunk in the outfield and the broken pane play. These are legal plays that are very bush league but we can't start using rules improperly to help. It's help we are allowed to give.

[Mr Umpire]

I also find it funny that people get so butt hurt about every little thing they read on the internet.

Some of you just need to relax.

Don't count on it. Also, one brings their own pre-disposition thoughts into anything read, heard, or seen. It is hard to separate how one feels and how one should view something.

I understand the issue at hand and what is inherently wrong with it. But, I don't care as an umpire. I call the game and leave my morals out of it. Which is the same way I approach these forums. I am not going to display my morals on here b/c it leaves many new umpires confused of how they should rule something. I think that is a bigger issue and something which needs to be addressed before posters bring their own morals or what the leagues want to "espouse" out of it. That has nothing to do with what the ruling should be.

And, it does pertain to this thread. The answer to the question "Is this cheating?" is no from a pure baseball stance. No rule has been broken, no official has been deceived, and there are rules to govern it if the defense sees it (the umpire has to see it to).

This kind of thread can definitely leave a new umpire confused on what the ruling should be when umpires start bringing in what they "believe" about the play.

[Mr Umpire]

I should have proofread my post. It should have said that I have no problem with the runner trying for home on the appeal, this is legal and an acceptable baseball play. The cutting across the infield is exactly the opposite. Your position is there is nothing illegal about it because there isn't a rule that says they can't. I pointed out that there was and you ignored it.

I ignored nothing and my position is not "there is nothing illegal". My position is "This is not cheating from a pure baseball stance".

The "gross miss" issue doesn't pertain to the situation. The runner didn't try to fix it. Since you brought up the "gross" miss, this is no different than this situation which discussed a lot about the "gross" miss.

R1 goes on a fly ball hit. He touches 2B and goes towards 3B. F8 catches it. Instead of R1 retouching 2B, his coach tells him to come straight to 1B without going to 2B. He just goes straight across the infield to beat the throw. When the throw goes out of play, he touches 2B on the way to 3B. He can't fix the "gross" miss he did by touching it the second time.

Is that cheating? By what I have seen so far, it is. And, he is considered to touch 2B until appealed. But, he cheated from what I have seen in this thread so far. If that is one's stance on it, then all missed bases is cheating. No matter how close he gets.

Again, morals or what a league "espouses" is not relevant to a ruling on the field. That is my approach to this thread. And, I will repeat, from a pure baseball stance, this is not cheating.

My "beliefs" are not going to be part of my answer. I think that is wrong given the intent of this forum. Maybe the thread should be in another category such as "Free for all" like Pete's thread of "LL mentality vs. a business". Maybe that is the part which "some will just refuse to 'get it'".

Edited March 25, 2010 by Mr Umpire

[Dragon29]

Wow! Did this take off!

I'd like to make a couple of comments and then bow out.

Mr Umpire

You keep bringing up morals. I don't see it as a moral issue in the least. I could care less if a team does this. Hell, there are times when I'd rather they do it so I can get another cheap Out.

My issue was whether or not it's 'cheating', 'against the rules', 'illegal' or whatever phrase you want to use. I stuck with the word 'illegal' because that's typical rule book language. Your assertion that there was nothing 'illegal' about it was, in my opinion, incorrect and I simply pointed that out. I still don't see how you don't see that, but I really don't care to hear any additional explanations or reasoning; we simply disagree on this.

tjthresh

You seem to laboring under the misapprehension that I was somehow 'hurt' by your comments. I wasn't. At all. I don't even know you.

I don't want to speak for BrianC14 (though, apparently, I already have!) but we were expressing our displeasure at the kind of coach that would encourage kids to cheat, trying to explain to you why we think it's sad that an adult would do that. Seeing it on the field, or in my minds' eye, would I initially laugh? Maybe. That doesn't make that coach any less sad or pathetic of a person.

[UmpJM]

Mr. Umpire,

Your inital post on this thread left me speechless, and I was incredulous that 2 other posters nominated it for a "post of the month" - apparently they misunderstand the concept.

This is the very definition of cheating. Well, at least one of them:

2. To violate rules deliberately, as in a game.

By your logic, a poker player who slipped an ace into his hand would not be cheating.

The coach is teaching 12 year olds how to cheat.

You seem to suggest this is no concern of the umpire, nor is the fact that the players are intentionally cheating. While I agree that it is not a "moral" issue and that moral issues are neither the umpire's concern nor responsibility, I believe I disagree with your essential point.

I absolutely agree with you about "making the call". If the defense properly appeals, I'm banging him out. If they don't, his advance stands.

But, ALL of the leagues I coach in (including "low level" NCAA, HS Varsity, Summer travel leagues as young as 14U, and NABL Men's leagues) have some kind of "sportsmanship" rules - these are actual rules, not just "espousals", that the umpire is responsible for enforcing. I believe it is a fundamental and essential responsibility of the umpire to, in the words of the OBR:

... be responsible for the conduct of the game in accordance with these official rules and for maintaining discipline and order on the playing field during the game.

...The umpire shall report to the league president within twelve hours after the end of a game all violations of rules and other incidents worthy of comment....

"Sportsmanship" is an especially strong point of emphasis at the "school" levels (FED & NCAA) and they ask that the umpires assertively manage sportsmanship issues.

I'm not sure exactly what I'd do. I would "call it" the same as you.

But I think I'd also take the first opportunity I had to discreetly let the coach know I was not amused and he might wish to consider knocking it off. Then see what happens. If he persisted, I'd probably just write him up and send it to the league. Without any editorial "moralizing".

If he pissed me off enough, I might do something else.

JM

Edited March 26, 2010 by UmpJM
Sarcasm removal.

[mstaylor]

MrUmpire:

You say you didn't ignore the broken rules portion of my post but you did and you still haven't adddressed it. You say there isn't a rule against but there is. There isn't anything we can enforce without an appeal from the defense but a runner must advance around the bases in order.

[Mr Umpire]

MrUmpire:

You say you didn't ignore the broken rules portion of my post but you did and you still haven't adddressed it. You say there isn't a rule against but there is. There isn't anything we can enforce without an appeal from the defense but a runner must advance around the bases in order.

Technically, and by rule, once he passes a base, he is considered to touch it. In this case, he "passed" 2B which is within the rules. He didn't get close but the rule does not say he has to "get close". He just has to "pass" it. It is an "illegal" action and I recognize that Dragon is sticking with that wording. That is correct, it is illegal and there is an "appeal" rule to handle that. But, it isn't something to be called as a rule violation until the defense catches it.

Now, if I haven't addressed it still, then lay it out for me again. Explain to me what you are looking for exactly. Tell me what rule I haven't addressed.

He "passed" 2B without touching it. It is an illegal act but not punishable until "appealed". What have I missed rule wise?

[Mr Umpire]

UmpJM, Dragon, and Brian,

I am in no way arguing that the coach shouldn't be teaching it. None whatsoever. I completely understand your issue with the coach. I didn't say it wasn't illegal. I said it wasn't "cheating". There is a difference to me and please, let me explain.

The poker example is about the player doing something completely outside of the rules of the game. If the official of that game catches him, then he is out of the game. Cutting across the infield from one base to another is not completely outside the rules of the game. The umpire does nothing upon seeing it. It is an illegal act punishable by an appeal. But, no one is being ejected. No one is being called out automatically. In the poker example, odds are someone is being kicked out or worse. In the OP, nothing happens unless appealed. And, no one is being ejected.

By my logic, the poker player is out of the game for "cheating" or a violation b/c he broke a rule punishable as soon as the official catches him. In the OP, he is not "cheating" or in violation b/c the official just watches it and remembers it if the other team catches him. This logic also goes for the speeding comparison. As soon as the official catches the driver, he gets a ticket for doing it.

I see a violation and illegal act as 2 separate things. A violation is punishable immediately such as INT or MC when the rules have it. The official calls something immediately without waiting for an appeal. An illegal act is something only punishable if the other team appeals it such as BOO or not tagging up after a catch.

Also, if the league requires this kind of thing to be reported, then do it. It is a violation of the league's "sportsmanship" rules without a doubt. I am not arguing that point at all. I understand the "cheating" part of it outside baseball rules. But, none of my responses deal with outside of baseball rules.

And, the part of the OBR I believe deals with violations which carry a penalty outside of the game. Mainly when someone is ejected from the game. Why were they ejected? I do not believe it has to do with this type of play but that is just me. This type of play won't be at that level so they don't have to worry about it.

Basically, I agree it is not "right" that the coach teaches it. But, I don't care what he is doing with his team. It is up to him to coach how he wants to. As an umpire, unless directed by the league to report it/inform him, I am not saying or doing anything about it. I am calling the game and that is it. Nothing more on my part needs to be done. Not even mentioning it to him unless the league wants it such as FED or whatever league. But, I am not limiting this down to a league. I am looking at it from a "pure baseball" view.

Nothing "cheating" about it. It is just an illegal act.

[mstaylor]

I will take one more shot then I'm going to leave it alone. The act of cutting across the infield is completely illegal, unsportsmanlike and something that should never be taught to a youth baseball team. I agree that I can't do anything about it until appealed but it has no business on a baseball field. I tell you one thing, if I believe the coach initiated it and not just a confused kid it is going to put the coach on a short leash.

[Mr Umpire]

I will take one more shot then I'm going to leave it alone. The act of cutting across the infield is completely illegal, unsportsmanlike and something that should never be taught to a youth baseball team. I agree that I can't do anything about it until appealed but it has no business on a baseball field. I tell you one thing, if I believe the coach initiated it and not just a confused kid it is going to put the coach on a short leash.

Again, I have no problem with how you feel about the coach and him teaching it. Everything in this post is correct.

It is "illegal" and that is it. Nothing more about it from a "pure baseball" view.

[BrianC14]

:clap:

So, "Mr. Umpire", you claim there's no place in baseball for morals. I think you're very, very wrong on that.

Yet I see you attempting to moralize in the "Time Limit Games" thread. (Page 6, as I recall)

Yes, there ARE umpires who cheat, too.

Like it or not, insists upon moral behavior by players and coaches, and umpires, too.

When a player cheats (such as that posed in this thread) there are consequences based on the letter of the rule. The runner in this situation made a conscious decision to skip a base. It isn't a matter of simply 'missing it'. That the behavior is taught by an alleged adult is what makes this especially problematic.

A bigger problem is if an umpire decides to cheat, where are the consequences for it?

Being an umpire DEMANDS a strong sense of morality. Without it, what's the point? You show me an umpire with no moral fiber, and I'll show you someone who should never be umpiring.

Like Mr. Taylor, I'm done with this, too. And as you have claimed, it's because "no one is being swayed". :shakehead:

Edited March 26, 2010 by BrianC14

[Mr Umpire]

So, "Mr. Umpire", you claim there's no place in baseball for morals. I think you're very, very wrong on that.

Yet I see you attempting to moralize in the "Time Limit Games" thread. (Page 6, as I recall)

Yes, there ARE umpires who cheat, too.

Like it or not, insists upon moral behavior by players and coaches, and umpires, too.

When a player cheats (such as that posed in this thread) there are consequences based on the letter of the rule. The runner in this situation made a conscious decision to skip a base. It isn't a matter of simply 'missing it'. That the behavior is taught by an alleged adult is what makes this especially problematic.

A bigger problem is if an umpire decides to cheat, where are the consequences for it?

Being an umpire DEMANDS a strong sense of morality. Without it, what's the point?

Like Mr. Taylor, I'm done with this, too. And as you have claimed, it's because "no one is being swayed".

Never said any of this. Never said umpires don't have morals nor that they shouldn't. Never said morals have no place in baseball. Point missed. Don't seem to 'get it' I guess.

Never said for umpires to "cheat". Where did that come from?

I still think it is funny how an anonymous user name bothers people.

Edited March 26, 2010 by Mr Umpire

[BrianC14]

Never said any of this. Never said umpires don't have morals nor that they shouldn't. Never said morals have no place in baseball. Point missed. Don't seem to 'get it' I guess.

Never said for umpires to "cheat". Where did that come from?

I still think it is funny how an anonymous user name bothers people.

Sorry, but morals are not a part of umpiring.

It's your very first post (see Page 2) in this thread. I guess 'De Nile' is not just a river in Egypt.

And no one ever said that you thought umpires should cheat. You need to read my reply again. You told someone that was discussing an umpire who cheated (in the Time Limit thread) that their comment was 'over the top'. I merely said that there are umpires who DO cheat. So yes, it IS a matter of morals when umpiring.

[Mr Umpire]

Let me explain this statement.

Sorry, but morals are not a part of umpiring.

When I said this, I was not referring to the umpire himself. I was referring to the [act of] umpiring. Meaning, calling things according to the rules. Being an umpire and umpiring are 2 separate things to me.

An umpire is a person. They have their "morals" and "beliefs". They use their judgment to make calls. They call things "as they see them".

The [act of] umpiring is calling things according to the rules. "Morals" and "beliefs" play no role in it. Only rules and interpretations. When an "immoral" act occurs, the umpire does nothing to correct it on his own based on how he "feels" about the play. It is called according to the rules.

[BrianC14]

Let me explain this statement.

When I said this, I was not referring to the umpire himself. I was referring to the [act of] umpiring. Meaning, calling things according to the rules. Being an umpire and umpiring are 2 separate things to me.

An umpire is a person. They have their "morals" and "beliefs". They use their judgment to make calls. They call things "as they see them".

The [act of] umpiring is calling things according to the rules. "Morals" and "beliefs" play no role in it. Only rules and interpretations. When an "immoral" act occurs, the umpire does nothing to correct it on his own based on how he "feels" about the play. It is called according to the rules.

You should change your screen name to "Mr. Politician".