Jump to content
  • 0

Where, in OBR, does it say PU must appeal on half swings?


Guest

Question

Guest James

I have read, on other posts on Umpire Empire, that PU must appeal to his partner when asked on a half swing. I have been unable to find this rule in OBR. Can someone please cite this rule?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 1

Old numbering, 9.02(c) comment; new numbering, 8.02(c) comment: "Appeals on a half swing may be made only on the call of ball and when asked to appeal, the home plate umpire must refer to a base umpire for his judgment on the half swing. Should the base umpire call the pitch a strike, the strike call shall prevail." Emphases added.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

It is under rule 9.02c (comment) based on the 2014 and earlier rule book numbering.

"Appeals on a half swing may be made only on the call of ball and when asked to appeal, the
home plate umpire must refer to a base umpire for his judgment on the half swing."

Edited by rpumpire
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Yep, I'm aware that this thread is six years old. 

BUT...would failure to ask, when asked to ask...be grounds for a protest? It would indeed be a misapplication of the rules. A smart crew would/could simply ask at the point of protest and it would invalidate the protest...correct? 

Assuming of course that protests are permitted. 

 

must.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 hour ago, johnnyg08 said:

Yep, I'm aware that this thread is six years old. 

BUT...would failure to ask, when asked to ask...be grounds for a protest? It would indeed be a misapplication of the rules. A smart crew would/could simply ask at the point of protest and it would invalidate the protest...correct? 

Assuming of course that protests are permitted. 

 

must.jpg

Is there a provision for nonsensical time-wasting appeals?   I could see, back in the day, someone like Billy Martin appealing "did he go" on every ball just to make some kind of point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
13 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

Is there a provision for nonsensical time-wasting appeals?   I could see, back in the day, someone like Billy Martin appealing "did he go" on every ball just to make some kind of point.

I don't think so... So, I would invoke 8.01(c) to rule on the situation of a manager making clearly frivolous appeals, and refuse to appeal on a pit h that the batter made absolutely no attempt to swing. If Billy (or whoever) didn't like it, I'd let whoever handles appeals in whatever league decide if it's a valid application if 8.01(c). Even if they don't, it would certainly not have a real effect on the game, and no replay of the game would (or at least, should) be ordered.

And there's a very real possibility I'm tossing Billy after the first time I refuse... Would probably put an end to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

@johnnyg08, you must be citing an OBR-based ruleset, because if I recall correctly, NFHS still lacks the compulsion / obligation / direction – “must” – for PU to check. I think that’s still a part of a Fed PU’s “god complex”, that he doesn’t have to, or can refuse to… 

… and one of the reasons why, I’ve heard, is due to this: 

22 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

Is there a provision for nonsensical time-wasting appeals?   I could see, back in the day, someone like Billy Martin appealing "did he go" on every ball just to make some kind of point.

I’ve attended more than my fair share of umpire / association meetings and classes, and the topic of check swing appeals comes up, and there’s always someone who mentions, or prognosticates, or recalls a game where the PU was so wishy-washy or milquetoast with his pitch calling that a coach (and/or thru his catcher) would invoke a check-swing appeal on every pitch, just to irritate and show up the PU. There have been, of course, no documented cases of that happening… but Nessie t-shirts and plushies are still sold, and the NFHS RC still has not modified that rule. Our own state association merely directs, “If you’re asked to check, just check.”

You gotta be a pretty stubborn ol* git of a PU if you refuse a check swing appeal… or working solo.
 

 

* - relative

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
2 minutes ago, MadMax said:

@johnnyg08, you must be citing an OBR-based ruleset, because if I recall correctly, NFHS still lacks the compulsion / obligation / direction – “must” – for PU to check. I think that’s still a part of a Fed PU’s “god complex”, that he doesn’t have to, or can refuse to… 

… and one of the reasons why, I’ve heard, is due to this: 

I’ve attended more than my fair share of umpire / association meetings and classes, and the topic of check swing appeals comes up, and there’s always someone who mentions, or prognosticates, or recalls a game where the PU was so wishy-washy or milquetoast with his pitch calling that a coach (and/or thru his catcher) would invoke a check-swing appeal on every pitch, just to irritate and show up the PU. There have been, of course, no documented cases of that happening… but Nessie t-shirts and plushies are still sold, and the NFHS RC still has not modified that rule. Our own state association merely directs, “If you’re asked to check, just check.”

You gotta be a pretty stubborn ol* git of a PU if you refuse a check swing appeal… or working solo.
 

 

* - relative

Slightly off topic, I'm not a fan of a safe signal when the PU doesn't judge an offer. Is this something that's being taught lately?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 hour ago, MadMax said:

@johnnyg08, you must be citing an OBR-based ruleset, because if I recall correctly, NFHS still lacks the compulsion / obligation / direction – “must” – for PU to check. I think that’s still a part of a Fed PU’s “god complex”, that he doesn’t have to, or can refuse to… 

… and one of the reasons why, I’ve heard, is due to this: 

I’ve attended more than my fair share of umpire / association meetings and classes, and the topic of check swing appeals comes up, and there’s always someone who mentions, or prognosticates, or recalls a game where the PU was so wishy-washy or milquetoast with his pitch calling that a coach (and/or thru his catcher) would invoke a check-swing appeal on every pitch, just to irritate and show up the PU. There have been, of course, no documented cases of that happening… but Nessie t-shirts and plushies are still sold, and the NFHS RC still has not modified that rule. Our own state association merely directs, “If you’re asked to check, just check.”

You gotta be a pretty stubborn ol* git of a PU if you refuse a check swing appeal… or working solo.
 

 

* - relative

You're right. I'm working out of OBR for this thread. You're also right that NFHS is the rule set that give the PU some discretion by rule. 

If a coach is being that big of an ass to my partner...I'm going to ask him to knock it off one time. If I judge his behavior to be ass-worthy again...I'm simply going to eject him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 hour ago, Jimurray said:

Slightly off topic, I'm not a fan of a safe signal when the PU doesn't judge an offer. Is this something that's being taught lately?

Yuck. I haven't been to a clinic in a while. Seems like overkill to me. Me not using a strike verbal/mechanic should be clue enough that I have a ball. Sometimes we need to stay out of our own way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 hour ago, Jimurray said:

I'm not a fan of a safe signal when the PU doesn't judge an offer.

On who’s part? The PU?? 

If we’ve got PU making a safe / that’s-nothing signal (either on his own, or taught to) to indicate he’s declining / denying / refusing a check swing appeal… 

😵

😬

🤨

Why not just grant the appeal??!!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
2 minutes ago, MadMax said:

On who’s part? The PU?? 

If we’ve got PU making a safe / that’s-nothing signal (either on his own, or taught to) to indicate he’s declining / denying / refusing a check swing appeal… 

😵

😬

🤨

Why not just grant the appeal??!!

I agree with that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
45 minutes ago, MadMax said:

On who’s part? The PU?? 

If we’ve got PU making a safe / that’s-nothing signal (either on his own, or taught to) to indicate he’s declining / denying / refusing a check swing appeal… 

😵

😬

🤨

Why not just grant the appeal??!!

What I’ve seen is an immediate safe before any appeal would even be asked. What’s interesting is it seems to forestall any ask at least in high school. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
3 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

What I’ve seen is an immediate safe before any appeal would even be asked. What’s interesting is it seems to forestall any ask at least in high school. 

Perhaps...but clutching the pearls on the "I'm not required to ask" in NFHS is something some need to move beyond. Nothing productive comes out of that...have a good pregame with your partner and if they want us to check...check. 

If they're being morons about it...we have tools at our disposal to snuff that out as well. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
25 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

What I’ve seen is an immediate safe before any appeal would even be asked. What’s interesting is it seems to forestall any ask at least in high school. 

On the other side...it tells the defense when to appeal...ump is calling safe/nothing on his own unless it's a swing...then he's waiting for the appeal.  At that point, why not just call the strike too?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
On 9/15/2021 at 9:48 AM, Jimurray said:

Slightly off topic, I'm not a fan of a safe signal when the PU doesn't judge an offer. Is this something that's being taught lately?

Yeah, no, thats not a thing... Well, I guess, based off your experience it is a thing, but it shouldn't. At pro school they teach the verbal "Ball! No he didn't go!", but even that's a bit much. If you really want to clarify that you saw the check and are ruling it no swing, then "ball, no he didn't!" is plenty

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...