massive clusterf*ck / sh*tstorm

[PonyUmpire]

I'm working a 10U little league tournament and am in the field. It's the fourth inning, with R1 and 1 out. The situation is a little complicated, so I'll describe it the best I can. BR hits the ball into the outfield. R1 rounds second, and starts going to third. Meanwhile, BR goes past second as well. R1 gets into a rundown between second and third. BR realizes he has to go back to first, but instead of retouching second on the way back, he cuts straight toward first. R1 then manages to get back to second safely. F6 noticed that BR missed second, and starts telling other players in the infield. R1, now on second, asks for time, which I DON'T grant (I make this very clear, saying "ball is still live"), because I anticipate an appeal by the defense. As the defense tries to figure out how to appeal, R1 breaks for third, and is tagged out on the way. OC then runs out onto the field (I call time at this point) yelling that R1 had "called time", and shouldn't have been out. In informed him that I hadn't granted time, and the out stood. The fans start screaming "that's ridiculous", "you're terrible". After much arguing, play resumed, after which F1 stepped off the rubber and threw to first. F3 tagged the BR (who is now R1), and I call him out on the appeal (for failing to retouch second). SH*# hits the fan. As this is the third out, I am walking toward right center field (where I stand between innings). As I'm walking out onto the grass, an assistant from the offensive team confronts me, saying that he's going to call the tournament director. "You don't know what you're doing, that's bullSH*#, that's bullSH*#!", he says. At this point, I turn around and toss him (1st career ejection).

So....... Thoughts? Feedback?

[krwill96]

In my opinion you handled everything good. You didn't call time because of the possible appeal no problem there. Then the assistant being ejected is spot on. No matter what level but especially a 10u coach yelling "that's bullSH*#" is an ejection.

[basejester]

'We thought the ball was dead, so we shouldn't be in jeopardy when we try to advance,' is a pretty silly argument.

I'm not sure I agree with your thought process about granting the timeout. Was there a reason the runner needed time?

[PonyUmpire]

'We thought the ball was dead, so we shouldn't be in jeopardy when we try to advance,' is a pretty silly argument.

I'm not sure I agree with your thought process about granting the timeout. Was there a reason the runner needed time?

During that game, players had requested time on numerous occasions for no reason whatsoever. In that scenario, the defense had all ready decided to appeal, and I saw no reason why the runner would need time.

[basejester]

Works for me. I think this is a SH*#storm of the OC's making.

[NCAAump2]

I've worked games 15U games where the infielders want time to throw the ball back to the pitcher, or the runner wants time after an attempted pick-off on him. I don't usually grant it in either situation.

[Jocko]

Ponyboy, good job of knowing responsibilities. I agree with everything you say you did. AC gets ZERO TOLERANCE from me. Great EJ. Lemme get this straight. R2 standing on 2b, R1 standing on 1b, and R2 attempts to steal. Ok, no problem there. He's tagged, you bang the out. Cool. OC argues that R1 asked for time? Why the hell would R2 try to steal 3b if you gave R1 time? Retarded argument. If you HAD granted time and R2 ran safely to 3b, you would send him back. The same d**khead OC would berate you for calling time for no reason. He's a douchebag and you were spot on.

[PonyUmpire]

Ponyboy, good job of knowing responsibilities. I agree with everything you say you did. AC gets ZERO TOLERANCE from me. Great EJ. Lemme get this straight. R2 standing on 2b, R1 standing on 1b, and R2 attempts to steal. Ok, no problem there. He's tagged, you bang the out. Cool. OC argues that R1 asked for time? Why the hell would R2 try to steal 3b if you gave R1 time? Retarded argument. If you HAD granted time and R2 ran safely to 3b, you would send him back. The same d**khead OC would berate you for calling time for no reason. He's a douchebag and you were spot on.

It wasn't really a steal. R2 sees that the defense is confused, and starts creeping off 2nd. He then breaks for 3rd, but the offense breaks off the appeal attempt and tags him out. (Since the ball is alive the entire time, it doesn't kill the appeal).

[moblue]

Some of this on the appeal is a HTBT situation. The way I am reading this though, there was a pause in the action between the time BR/R1 asks for time, the defense attempts to figure out how the appeal should work, and R2 breaking for 3B. If there was a break in the continuous action, then the defense lost their right to make an appeal when they put out R2 at third. Now, that said, I don't know if there was enough of a break that maybe all of that could still be considered continuous action. If it was, then the runner would be out on appeal. Either way, it sounds like you did a good job handling the situation. Younger players always seem to create the most confusing plays possible.

[noumpere]

It wasn't really a steal. R2 sees that the defense is confused, and starts creeping off 2nd. He then breaks for 3rd, but the offense breaks off the appeal attempt and tags him out. (Since the ball is alive the entire time, it doesn't kill the appeal).

The ball remaining live isn't the criteria for whether a play kills the right to appeal.

[PonyUmpire]

It wasn't really a steal. R2 sees that the defense is confused, and starts creeping off 2nd. He then breaks for 3rd, but the offense breaks off the appeal attempt and tags him out. (Since the ball is alive the entire time, it doesn't kill the appeal).

The ball remaining live isn't the criteria for whether a play kills the right to appeal.

What I mean is, if I had called time, the ball had been put into play again, and the runner had attempted to steal, that would have killed the appeal. Because he tried for third as part of continuous action, however, the appeal remained valid.

[Jocko]

I think you're playing OBR here, correct? If so:

PBUCUM 6.2.1 - "Any appeal under OBR 7.10 must be made before the next pitch or any play or attempted play. (Reference 6.1)"

PBUCUM 6.1 "A play or attempted play shall be interpreted as a legitimate effort by a defensive player who has posession of the ball to actually retire a runner. This may include an actual attempt to tag a runner, a fielder running toward a base with the ball in an attempt to force or tag a runner, or actually throwing to another defensive player in an attempt to retire a runner. The fact that the runner is not out is irrelevant. A fake or feint to throw shall not be deemed a play or attempted play."

Approved rulings-

Play 4 - "Runner on 1st, one out. The batter singles. Runner from 1st misses second and advances to third without a play. The ball comes into the infield and is returned to the pitcher. The pitcher stretches, comes to a set position and then legally steps off the rubber to start an appeal at second base. The original runner from first (now on third) breaks for home as the defense starts its appeal. The pitcher, instead of completing his appeal play, throws home to get the runner, but the tag is too late, and he is ruled safe. Can the defensive team still appeal at second base?"

Ruling - "No. The defensive team's attempt to retire the original runner occured after a definite break in the original continuous action that was created by and followed the batted ball. Therefore, the defensive team lost its right to make any appeals once it made the play at home and may not appeal."

While not exact as OP, very similar. IMO, the way you described it, they lost their right to appeal.

[basejester]

The pitcher stretches, comes to a set position and then legally steps off the rubber to start an appeal at second base.

Is this part significant? Is the casebook separating "plays" by these actions by the pitcher? If not, why include them?

[umpire_scott]

I think you're playing OBR here, correct? If so:

PBUCUM 6.2.1 - "Any appeal under OBR 7.10 must be made before the next pitch or any play or attempted play. (Reference 6.1)"

PBUCUM 6.1 "A play or attempted play shall be interpreted as a legitimate effort by a defensive player who has posession of the ball to actually retire a runner. This may include an actual attempt to tag a runner, a fielder running toward a base with the ball in an attempt to force or tag a runner, or actually throwing to another defensive player in an attempt to retire a runner. The fact that the runner is not out is irrelevant. A fake or feint to throw shall not be deemed a play or attempted play."

Approved rulings-

Play 4 - "Runner on 1st, one out. The batter singles. Runner from 1st misses second and advances to third without a play. The ball comes into the infield and is returned to the pitcher. The pitcher stretches, comes to a set position and then legally steps off the rubber to start an appeal at second base. The original runner from first (now on third) breaks for home as the defense starts its appeal. The pitcher, instead of completing his appeal play, throws home to get the runner, but the tag is too late, and he is ruled safe. Can the defensive team still appeal at second base?"

Ruling - "No. The defensive team's attempt to retire the original runner occured after a definite break in the original continuous action that was created by and followed the batted ball. Therefore, the defensive team lost its right to make any appeals once it made the play at home and may not appeal."

While not exact as OP, very similar. IMO, the way you described it, they lost their right to appeal.

I see a distinct difference here in that the play in the case play involved a play on the same runner, whereas the play in the OP involved an appeal on a different runner.

[Jocko]

I think you're playing OBR here, correct? If so:

PBUCUM 6.2.1 - "Any appeal under OBR 7.10 must be made before the next pitch or any play or attempted play. (Reference 6.1)"

PBUCUM 6.1 "A play or attempted play shall be interpreted as a legitimate effort by a defensive player who has posession of the ball to actually retire a runner. This may include an actual attempt to tag a runner, a fielder running toward a base with the ball in an attempt to force or tag a runner, or actually throwing to another defensive player in an attempt to retire a runner. The fact that the runner is not out is irrelevant. A fake or feint to throw shall not be deemed a play or attempted play."

Approved rulings-

Play 4 - "Runner on 1st, one out. The batter singles. Runner from 1st misses second and advances to third without a play. The ball comes into the infield and is returned to the pitcher. The pitcher stretches, comes to a set position and then legally steps off the rubber to start an appeal at second base. The original runner from first (now on third) breaks for home as the defense starts its appeal. The pitcher, instead of completing his appeal play, throws home to get the runner, but the tag is too late, and he is ruled safe. Can the defensive team still appeal at second base?"

Ruling - "No. The defensive team's attempt to retire the original runner occured after a definite break in the original continuous action that was created by and followed the batted ball. Therefore, the defensive team lost its right to make any appeals once it made the play at home and may not appeal."

While not exact as OP, very similar. IMO, the way you described it, they lost their right to appeal.

I see a distinct difference here in that the play in the case play involved a play on the same runner, whereas the play in the OP involved an appeal on a different runner.

true, but immaterial. The case play isn't the same, but similar. There isn't one for retouching a base in PBUCUM, so I found the closest one. That being said, the ruling should be the same. There was definitely a play in the OP and the case play AFTER a break in continuous action. THAT is what kills the right to appeal.

[Jocko]

The pitcher stretches, comes to a set position and then legally steps off the rubber to start an appeal at second base.

Is this part significant? Is the casebook separating "plays" by these actions by the pitcher? If not, why include them?

yes, because if he balks, they lose appeal rights

[umpire_scott]

I think you're playing OBR here, correct? If so:

PBUCUM 6.2.1 - "Any appeal under OBR 7.10 must be made before the next pitch or any play or attempted play. (Reference 6.1)"

PBUCUM 6.1 "A play or attempted play shall be interpreted as a legitimate effort by a defensive player who has posession of the ball to actually retire a runner. This may include an actual attempt to tag a runner, a fielder running toward a base with the ball in an attempt to force or tag a runner, or actually throwing to another defensive player in an attempt to retire a runner. The fact that the runner is not out is irrelevant. A fake or feint to throw shall not be deemed a play or attempted play."

Approved rulings-

Play 4 - "Runner on 1st, one out. The batter singles. Runner from 1st misses second and advances to third without a play. The ball comes into the infield and is returned to the pitcher. The pitcher stretches, comes to a set position and then legally steps off the rubber to start an appeal at second base. The original runner from first (now on third) breaks for home as the defense starts its appeal. The pitcher, instead of completing his appeal play, throws home to get the runner, but the tag is too late, and he is ruled safe. Can the defensive team still appeal at second base?"

Ruling - "No. The defensive team's attempt to retire the original runner occured after a definite break in the original continuous action that was created by and followed the batted ball. Therefore, the defensive team lost its right to make any appeals once it made the play at home and may not appeal."

While not exact as OP, very similar. IMO, the way you described it, they lost their right to appeal.

I see a distinct difference here in that the play in the case play involved a play on the same runner, whereas the play in the OP involved an appeal on a different runner.

true, but immaterial. The case play isn't the same, but similar. There isn't one for retouching a base in PBUCUM, so I found the closest one. That being said, the ruling should be the same. There was definitely a play in the OP and the case play AFTER a break in continuous action. THAT is what kills the right to appeal.

True, but I think what makes the case play different is that the pitcher took the mound and stepped off to initiate the appeal. In the OP not only was the play made on a different runner, but it was all during continuous action. I could be wrong but I don't think the case play is close enough to be used for a ruling on the OP play.

[noumpere]

Whether or not the play and the appeal are on the same runner or different runners doesnt matter. The only thing that matters is continuous action. If the ball gets to the pitcher and he gets on the rubber thats (almost) definitely not continuous action (and the almost is in there only because someone will come up with some really weird play where it matters). IF some runner or another has not stopped and the defense is still throwing the ball then thats (almost) definitely continuous action.

The first post play is inbetween so its some judgement thats needed. Id certainly err on the side of it being continuous and allow the appeal.

Note that in HS or in college if the offense initiates a play then the right to appeal is not lost -- just to prevent this sort of shenanigans.

[UmpJM]

So, if I understand the point of contention so far, it is whether or not the defense has lost it's right to appeal the miss of 2B due to the preceding (successful) "play" on the runner trying to acquire 3B.

This all boils down to the proper interpretation of "continuous action" which, though not used in the actual text of the rules, IS used in the PBUC (and MLBUM) which have the "force of law" for their respective constituencies. Unfortunately, neither actually DEFINES what the term means. To my knowledge, the only authoritative resource which DOES define it is J/R.

...an uninterrupted progression of play starting with the pitch and ending typically when the runners have ceased trying to advance and the defense has relaxed and is returning (or has returned) the ball to the pitcher. ....

While this is not an "official" interpretation, it is certainly a usable definition and there's nothing available that I'm aware of that's any more authoritative.

Now, based on PonyUmpire's description of the action in the OP, the "progression of play" was "continuing" in his sitch, because as the ball came into the infield, the defense wasn't returning the ball to the pitcher to get ready for the NEXT play, they were trying to figure out how to appeal the runner's miss of 2B when the runner took off for 3B. To me, the play at 3B was part of the SAME "continuous action" as the "play" during which the baserunning infraction occurred.

So, I would sustain the appeal and NOT consider the play at 3B a "post continuous action" play. Ultimately, only PonyUmpire can say for sure.

Plus, in my experience, outs can sometimes be hard to come by in a 10U game and "weird stuff" tends to happen after the "initial action" of a play, so, at that level, I'm likely to not consider the play OVER until the pitcher is on the rubber with the ball.

JM

[Jocko]

It wasn't really a steal. R2 sees that the defense is confused, and starts creeping off 2nd. He then breaks for 3rd, but the offense breaks off the appeal attempt and tags him out. (Since the ball is alive the entire time, it doesn't kill the appeal).

This is the part I'm talking about. They made an play or attempted play before the appeal. The action seems to have subsided as they tried to figure out how to appeal, and then picked back up on R2 tag. Seems like 2 separate incidents to me, which kills the appeal.

Question: Who had the ball during all this?

[PonyUmpire]

It wasn't really a steal. R2 sees that the defense is confused, and starts creeping off 2nd. He then breaks for 3rd, but the offense breaks off the appeal attempt and tags him out. (Since the ball is alive the entire time, it doesn't kill the appeal).

This is the part I'm talking about. They made an play or attempted play before the appeal. The action seems to have subsided as they tried to figure out how to appeal, and then picked back up on R2 tag. Seems like 2 separate incidents to me, which kills the appeal.

Question: Who had the ball during all this?

The shortstop had the ball

[Jocko]

I see. Consider that a vital piece of information. While I think there's an argument for dead appeal, F6 still had the ball. HTBT in any case, and you said the appeal was still valid. Soooo...... Good call, Pony. You're working hard, gaining experience, and learning. Keep it up!

[SanDiegoSteve]

Now that we have that little nugget of information that F6 still had the ball, it is continuous action and the appeal is honored. Two outs. Where many inexperienced players and coaches goof up is giving the ball to the pitcher thinking that the pitcher needs to get on the rubber and then step off the rubber, even when the ball is still alive. Another case of not knowing the rules.

[PonyUmpire]

Thanks guys. It makes me feel better that I handled the situation appropriately. I'm trying to think of what I could have done differently in terms of game management, but I think that this sort of play is almost guaranteed to cause a huge controversy.

[Pete Peterson Sr]

Ponyboy, good job of knowing responsibilities. I agree with everything you say you did. AC gets ZERO TOLERANCE from me. Great EJ. Lemme get this straight. R2 standing on 2b, R1 standing on 1b, and R2 attempts to steal. Ok, no problem there. He's tagged, you bang the out. Cool. OC argues that R1 asked for time? Why the hell would R2 try to steal 3b if you gave R1 time? Retarded argument. If you HAD granted time and R2 ran safely to 3b, you would send him back. The same d**khead OC would berate you for calling time for no reason. He's a douchebag and you were spot on.

Whadaya say you stop sugar-coating things, huh ?? LOL