Neighborhood Play

[mstaylor]

Remember why they use the neighbourhood play and becomes easy. The purpose to protect the infielder. He was straddling and stationary, he wasn't looking for protection so don't give it to him.<br /><br />Sent from my C771 using Tapatalk 2<br /><br />

[Jocko]

I never really given neighborhood play, as the runners have to hit all bags so do fielders if force or tag.... im not going to allow that to happen. I can't speak for others

so this means you don't strike the black part of the plate, correct? It's technically not part of the zone.

[Umpiresoftball]

 

I never really given neighborhood play, as the runners have to hit all bags so do fielders if force or tag.... im not going to allow that to happen. I can't speak for others

so this means you don't strike the black part of the plate, correct? It's technically not part of the zone.

 

In that sense, i don't know really good question... But the saying is if it hits the black part of the plate, than it has to hit part of the white. With softball balls there much larger so they cover more zone. with baseball much more harder to do. I don't think i ever change the way i call.

[Rich Ives]

So if it's OK for the fielder to miss the base by 4" then it's OK for a runner going by to miss the base by 4" - right?  Safe on appeal - right?

 

The neighborhood play is dead.  The reason for allowing it was fixed via rule changes and interpretation changes.

 

Instant replay in televised games causes the umpires to get too much grief.

 

On the small diamond the fans and coaches are too close - they see it too well.

 

And - Mom or Dad will post your "bad call" on youtube.

[immaculate1976]

I think the neighborhood play is stupid and alot of umps use it to avoid a fight with the coach. I would rather argue he was safe and know i am right than argue and know the coach is right

[basejester]

I think we still give the defense the benefit of the doubt (like we would give the offense on a missed base appeal).  We have to see clearly that the base was touched - not just fail to see the base was touched.

 

But that's about it.

[BigUmpire]

So if it's OK for the fielder to miss the base by 4" then it's OK for a runner going by to miss the base by 4" - right?  Safe on appeal - right?

 

The neighborhood play is dead.  The reason for allowing it was fixed via rule changes and interpretation changes.

 

Instant replay in televised games causes the umpires to get too much grief.

 

On the small diamond the fans and coaches are too close - they see it too well.

 

And - Mom or Dad will post your "bad call" on youtube.

Mike Taylor is clearly the sage on this site BUT you are no slouch sir. I respect your opinion BUT how do you repond to Mikes statement:" Remember why they use the neighbourhood play and becomes easy. The purpose to protect the infielder. He was straddling and stationary, he wasn't looking for protection so don't give it to him".

[basejester]

Based on their comments, Rich and Mike would both have safe on that play.  I read Rich's questions as Socratic.

[Rich Ives]

 

So if it's OK for the fielder to miss the base by 4" then it's OK for a runner going by to miss the base by 4" - right?  Safe on appeal - right?

 

The neighborhood play is dead.  The reason for allowing it was fixed via rule changes and interpretation changes.

 

Instant replay in televised games causes the umpires to get too much grief.

 

On the small diamond the fans and coaches are too close - they see it too well.

 

And - Mom or Dad will post your "bad call" on youtube.

Mike Taylor is clearly the sage on this site BUT you are no slouch sir. I respect your opinion BUT how do you repond to Mikes statement:" Remember why they use the neighbourhood play and becomes easy. The purpose to protect the infielder. He was straddling and stationary, he wasn't looking for protection so don't give it to him".

 

 

 

As I said  "The reason for allowing the neighborhood play was fixed via rule changes and interpretation changes."

 

Too many of you aren't old enough I guess.

 

You used to be able to blast the pivot man into LF. You could go way way away from the base to break up the play. You could roll block the pivot man. It was really dangerous in there.  The rule changes (FPSR, MC, etc.) and interps have eliminated the problem at the non-pro level and eliminated most of the problem at the pro levels (no roll block, slide within reach) so there's no more need for the neighborhood call.

[maven]

As I said  "The reason for allowing the neighborhood play was fixed via rule changes and interpretation changes."

 

Too many of you aren't old enough I guess.

 

You used to be able to blast the pivot man into LF. You could go way way away from the base to break up the play. You could roll block the pivot man. It was really dangerous in there.  The rule changes (FPSR, MC, etc.) and interps have eliminated the problem at the non-pro level and eliminated most of the problem at the pro levels (no roll block, slide within reach) so there's no more need for the neighborhood call.

This explains the point I was making in post #6 of this thread. There used to be a good reason to allow fielders leeway turning a DP, namely, self-preservation. As the game has evolved, they're no longer in danger. Why continue to excuse them from the requirement to tag the base?

 

That said, I do call it somewhat loosely: if they catch and throw in rhythm, I give a tiny bit of leeway in the timing of the tag. I suppose I still call a bit of a neighborhood play with respect to timing, but not location. A fielder who fails to tag the base, or whose timing is badly off, will not get an out call from me.

 

The defense loses the benefit of the doubt with a bad throw or misplayed catch.

[BigUmp56]

The ONLY problem I have with completely doing away with the neighborhood play is the FED FPSR that basically allows a runner to spike a fielder covering the bag, provided it's below the knee. I've seen some nasty gashes on players who've been cleated mid-shin. Until they do a little more to protect the fielder, I'm going to be giving them the benefit of the doubt if they happen to receive the ball a split second after coming across the bag.

 

Tim.

[Rich Ives]

You could try teaching the fielder how to get out of the way.  Why lay it all on the runner?

[mstaylor]

You could try teaching the fielder how to get out of the way.  Why lay it all on the runner?

Because the runner is threw imbibe causing the injury. I agree that with the FPSR it isn't needed at the truth level. At the pro level they are tightening the interference calls so it is less needed. However, there are youth systems that don't have a FPSR and you can have interference without MC.

Sent from my C771 using Tapatalk 2

[Rich Ives]

 

You could try teaching the fielder how to get out of the way.  Why lay it all on the runner?

Because the runner is threw imbibe causing the injury. I agree that with the FPSR it isn't needed at the truth level. At the pro level they are tightening the interference calls so it is less needed. However, there are youth systems that don't have a FPSR and you can have interference without MC.

Sent from my C771 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

threw imbibe?  The curse of autocorrect? What did you mean?

 

The fielder has no responsibility to know how to get out of the way?  He'll get killed in NCAA (can slide through the base) or in a pro game.

[carolinablue]

Rich, OBR still will let a runner break-up the DP as long as he can reach the base, correct? That would include LL. Fielder still needs to avoid runner.

[zm1283]

The ONLY problem I have with completely doing away with the neighborhood play is the FED FPSR that basically allows a runner to spike a fielder covering the bag, provided it's below the knee. I've seen some nasty gashes on players who've been cleated mid-shin. Until they do a little more to protect the fielder, I'm going to be giving them the benefit of the doubt if they happen to receive the ball a split second after coming across the bag.

 

Tim.

 

A competent middle infielder will move out of the path of the base line, even with the FPSR.  The FED rule is the most restrictive and safest for the fielder, so I"m not sure what else could be done rule-wise to help.  

[Rich Ives]

Rich, OBR still will let a runner break-up the DP as long as he can reach the base, correct? That would include LL. Fielder still needs to avoid runner.

 

I understand that - that's why a question, not a statement, to Mike. He and others don't seem to get it.

[carolinablue]

 

Rich, OBR still will let a runner break-up the DP as long as he can reach the base, correct? That would include LL. Fielder still needs to avoid runner.

 

I understand that - that's why a question, not a statement, to Mike. He and others don't seem to get it.

 

 

Sorry, might have misunderstood. I thought you were arguing that the rules had basically taken the need for F4/F6 to avoid a runner trying to break up the DP.

[BigUmp56]

The ONLY problem I have with completely doing away with the neighborhood play is the FED FPSR that basically allows a runner to spike a fielder covering the bag, provided it's below the knee. I've seen some nasty gashes on players who've been cleated mid-shin. Until they do a little more to protect the fielder, I'm going to be giving them the benefit of the doubt if they happen to receive the ball a split second after coming across the bag.

 

Tim.

 

A competent middle infielder will move out of the path of the base line, even with the FPSR.  The FED rule is the most restrictive and safest for the fielder, so I"m not sure what else could be done rule-wise to help.

You're absolutely right. They will move out of the baseline, and the really smart ones make sure that they're off of the bag when the runner gets there. But as I said, I'm giving them the out if they come across the bag a split second before they receive the ball. I'm not going to give them the out if they miss the bag entirely or if they're way off if it. It's what's expected in the conference as to how the turn is to be called. And I would like to see FED force runners to have to slide and make no contact with a fielders leg with their cleats. If they're really trying to only reach the base their lead foot should be sliding on the ground, not six to eight inches off of the ground.

Tim.

[mstaylor]

Not touching the fielder is not reasonable to expect. You have to allow him to slide to the bag, if the fielder hasn't cleared, tough luck.<br /><br />Sent from my C771 using Tapatalk 2<br /><br />

[BigUmp56]

Not touching the fielder is not reasonable to expect. You have to allow him to slide to the bag, if the fielder hasn't cleared, tough luck.<br /><br />Sent from my C771 using Tapatalk 2<br /><br />

I didn't say anything about not being able to make any contact at all. I said they should not be allowed to cleat them......period. If a runner is doing what they're supposed to be doing they wouldn't have their lead leg lifted. Your comment about the fielder not being cleared is the entire reason the neighborhood play exists. If you think thete's anything even remotely acceptable about a 17 year old kid being laid wide open after being cleated, you need to re-examine why you work that level.

Tim.

[mstaylor]

This is why Fed requires the slider to have his foot below the knee. Cleatings can happen in the best of slides, unfortunate but true. Different situation but I had a perfectly legal slide at the plate, catcher goes down to tag him and his cleat hit his glove and up his arm. 22 stitches later he was fine. His dad was a surgeon and sewed him up at the kitchen table. 

[mstaylor]

 

You could try teaching the fielder how to get out of the way.  Why lay it all on the runner?

Because the runner is threw imbibe causing the injury. I agree that with the FPSR it isn't needed at the truth level. At the pro level they are tightening the interference calls so it is less needed. However, there are youth systems that don't have a FPSR and you can have interference without MC.

Sent from my C771 using Tapatalk 2

 

Because the runner is threw imbibe causing the injury.....correction is .......is there causing the injury. 

 I agree that with the FPSR it isn't needed at the truth level.....correction is.....FED level. 

I don't generally call the neighborhood play but in systems without a FPSR I can see the need. If you are going to allow the runner to slide either side of the bag then the fielder has little chance to clear that far. We are really arguing a difference without a distinction. 

[Rich Ives]

 

Not touching the fielder is not reasonable to expect. You have to allow him to slide to the bag, if the fielder hasn't cleared, tough luck.<br /><br />Sent from my C771 using Tapatalk 2<br /><br />

I didn't say anything about not being able to make any contact at all. I said they should not be allowed to cleat them......period. If a runner is doing what they're supposed to be doing they wouldn't have their lead leg lifted. Your comment about the fielder not being cleared is the entire reason the neighborhood play exists. If you think thete's anything even remotely acceptable about a 17 year old kid being laid wide open after being cleated, you need to re-examine why you work that level.

Tim.

 

 

If the slide is straight in and the runner does not slash at or kick at the fielder (just a straight slide)  and the foot/leg contact is below the knee (standing erect) then it's legal. Sometimes s^&t happens.  Doesn't make it illegal.

[BigUmp56]

Not touching the fielder is not reasonable to expect. You have to allow him to slide to the bag, if the fielder hasn't cleared, tough luck.<br /><br />Sent from my C771 using Tapatalk 2<br /><br />

I didn't say anything about not being able to make any contact at all. I said they should not be allowed to cleat them......period. If a runner is doing what they're supposed to be doing they wouldn't have their lead leg lifted. Your comment about the fielder not being cleared is the entire reason the neighborhood play exists. If you think thete's anything even remotely acceptable about a 17 year old kid being laid wide open after being cleated, you need to re-examine why you work that level.

Tim.

Thank you for stating the obvious, Rich. It's because $hit happens and spiking a fielder below the knee is a legal move that causes me to dislike the rule. And as I said before, the way I call the turn is the way it's expected to be called in the primary conference that our association contracts with. I understand your position. I simply don't agree with it. And since only one of us has a vested interest in how it should be called, I'll continue to call it the way it needs to be called.

Tim.

If the slide is straight in and the runner does not slash at or kick at the fielder (just a straight slide) and the foot/leg contact is below the knee (standing erect) then it's legal. Sometimes s^&t happens. Doesn't make it illegal.

Sorry I messed up the quote function so bad!