dropped third strike -- did ump screw up?

[cgfreeman]

Situation:

Bases loaded, no one out. Batter swings at strike three and ball gets by the catcher to the backstop. All three runners advance on wild pitch, but batter runs to first, mistakenly thinking that he can run if catcher drops third strike.

Umpire's ruling:

Umpire calls batter out, since first base was occupied with less than two outs (correct, obviously). But ump also calls runner originally on second base out. When asked for clarification, umpire says that batter interfered with the defense. Umpire states that interference includes "confusing" the defense, and by running to first base when he was already out on strikes, the batter confused the defense. The penalty for this infraction was to call runner on second base out.

Net result of play -- two outs, run scores, runner on second base.

I cannot believe that this is the right call, but I figured I would ask the experts.

Thanks,

Charlie

[UmpJM]

cgfreeman,

The ump was making stuff up.

There is no penalty for the BR intentionally or mistakenly running to 1B even though he was out on strikes. The defense is responsible for knowing that he has been retired and making the appropriate play on the viable runners attempting to advance.

JM

[cgfreeman]

JM,

Thanks. This is what I thought. Ump kept saying he wanted to "penalize" the offensive team for their batter running to first when already retired on strikes.

Charlie

[JaxRolo]

He was making his own Rules! :lookup

[SanDiegoSteve]

The kind of stuff that makes people hate umpires. Just great. :hopmad:

[mjr_2013]

Total misapplication.

It obviously states right in the Official 2012 mjr_2013 book of making-stuff-up that the runner on 2nd may only be called out on the 3rd rescheduled doubleheader game of a Tri-town league tournament being held in Wichita, Kansas under mildly pleasant weather conditions!

I swear, those parent umps who don't know the simplest of my rule applications will be the death of me.

:smachhead:

[T-Rav]

Total misapplication.

It obviously states right in the Official 2012 mjr_2013 book of making-stuff-up that the runner on 2nd may only be called out on the 3rd rescheduled doubleheader game of a Tri-town league tournament being held in Wichita, Kansas under mildly pleasant weather conditions!

I swear, those parent umps who don't know the simplest of my rule applications will be the death of me.

Sorry but I wouldn't expect parent who is umpiring to having a vast knowledge of rules- hell I'd be happy if they knew fair/foul. But if you are getting paid to do a game you better know what the hell your talking about when you step on the diamond. From the situation posted, it sounds like the umpire in this case might have wanted to steal an out just to get the game over with, with a misapplication of the interference rule.

[carolinablue]

How did he determine it was R1 out instead of one of the other runners. Definately MSU.

[cgfreeman]

Hi all,

Thanks for all the input. I was beginning to think I had entered some bizzarro-world, like the Twilight Zone...

The shocking thing in this case is that it was not a parent umpire, it was a professional umpire in a travel 12U league game. I have no idea how he selected R2 to be the one to call out here... I just wish the umpire would man up and admit he made a mistake instead of trying to justify this after the fact. But alas, I've heard that he was approached by the commishioner about it and is trying to defend the call. Thank goodness the call did not affect the outcome of the game... Hopefully the commish will step in and set the record straight here.

--Charlie

[semper_fi_72]

Hi all,

Thanks for all the input. I was beginning to think I had entered some bizzarro-world, like the Twilight Zone...

The shocking thing in this case is that it was not a parent umpire, it was a professional umpire in a travel 12U league game. I have no idea how he selected R2 to be the one to call out here... I just wish the umpire would man up and admit he made a mistake instead of trying to justify this after the fact. But alas, I've heard that he was approached by the commishioner about it and is trying to defend the call. Thank goodness the call did not affect the outcome of the game... Hopefully the commish will step in and set the record straight here.

--Charlie

Lets not call this guy professional even if he got paid.

Smitty collecting money is a better term.

Also sounds like he needs to buy a rulebook, wait, better off he needs to buy it from Books on Tape, since he probably can't read :lookup

[Minnz]

What is crazy is when he made up the rule he LET the run count. The idea is to always penalize as much as you can to offending team. Allowing run to score just really blows his cover.

[johnnyg08]

Lets not call this guy professional even if he got paid.

Smitty collecting money is a better term.

Good one!

[SanDiegoSteve]

The shocking thing in this case is that it was not a parent umpire, it was a professional umpire in a travel 12U league game.

I wouldn't be so fast and loose with the word "professional" in this guy's case.

[johnnyg08]

it was a professional umpire in a travel 12U league game.

Because he wasn't wearing his leg guards on the outside of his pants.

"Sounds like an impostor. A fan in an umpire uniform" - Jim Evans