RLI not called

[rjt6]

The call was missed - he was running in the grass the whole time.  I do have to agree with the announcer - I think it's Harold Reynolds, when he was talking about how the bag is in the lane where you are not supposed to run.

[ricka56]

The rule is here to keep players from cheating (I was one). I tried to make it impossible to deliver a throw to F3, even if it meant taking one in the head/back. That (cheating) is not part of the spirit of this simple game. The rule reasonably requires BR to stay out of the way of the throw. Also, those that point out that 1B is out of the RL (HR), don't talk about the part of the RL rule that permits BR to exit the RL when in the vicinity of 1B. When BR doesn't adheres to the rule and he mucks up the play, he and his team is justly penalized.

And when the throw is marginal (as was in the OP), the benefit of the doubt goes to the defense when BR is out of the RL. Maybe this MLB umpire thought the throw was less than marginal...that's his judgment...his prerogative. In games I do, my judgment would be that that throw was good enough for RLI call.

[Jimurray]

The rule is here to keep players from cheating (I was one). I tried to make it impossible to deliver a throw to F3, even if it meant taking one in the head/back. That (cheating) is not part of the spirit of this simple game. The rule reasonably requires BR to stay out of the way of the throw. Also, those that point out that 1B is out of the RL (HR), don't talk about the part of the RL rule that permits BR to exit the RL when in the vicinity of 1B. When BR doesn't adheres to the rule and he mucks up the play, he and his team is justly penalized.

And when the throw is marginal (as was in the OP), the benefit of the doubt goes to the defense when BR is out of the RL. Maybe this MLB umpire thought the throw was less than marginal...that's his judgment...his prerogative. In games I do, my judgment would be that that throw was good enough for RLI call.

Why does the rule protect 1B but not any other base? Just stirring sht.

[noumpere]

Why does the rule protect 1B but not any other base? Just stirring sht.

Reason 1) Because the batter can (somewhat) control where the ball goes; other runners cannot.

 

Without this rule, you'd see more bunts and the batter intentionally running "in the way."

 

Reason 2)  Because the BR can overrun first without being out, so the rule protects F3 (or did when the bag was centered over the base point (as 2nd) is.  So, the rule forced the BR to be in foul and, thus, be more likely to touch the outside half of the bag, giving the inside half to the fielder.

[Rich Ives]

You know I mean their modifications and "special" rules.

Oh those, like pitching limits, re-entry, minimum play, no head first slides advancing, slide or attempt to go around.  I can see why on those. Who'd want to use those? How silly.  Oh wait! FED has pitching limits, re-entry, FPSR. LL's not exclusive on those.

Some people can't stand the no-lead rule. I get that objection.

The call was missed - he was running in the grass the whole time.  I do have to agree with the announcer - I think it's Harold Reynolds, when he was talking about how the bag is in the lane where you are not supposed to run.

The throw sucked.

[DVA7130]

Oh those, like pitching limits, re-entry, minimum play, no head first slides advancing, slide or attempt to go around.  I can see why on those. Who'd want to use those? How silly.  Oh wait! FED has pitching limits, re-entry, FPSR. LL's not exclusive on those.

Some people can't stand the no-lead rule. I get that objection.

The throw sucked.

Arbitrary pitcher to catcher vise versa rules, yes no head first slides, 12 year olds playing 8 year old no lead off, counting individual pitches, suggesting umpires throw little red flags.. and a tendency to pack in as many local fool's rules as possible. Is that crap rule book still only available for purchase as well? I hate FED only slightly less btw.

And the association with this crap: http://umpire-empire.com/index.php?/topic/59339-ptc-little-league-fiasco/ I am beyond done with the nonsense. It was my hellhole start, and now I've moved on to greener fields.

[Rich Ives]

Arbitrary pitcher to catcher vise versa rules, yes no head first slides, 12 year olds playing 8 year old no lead off, counting individual pitches, suggesting umpires throw little red flags.. and a tendency to pack in as many local fool's rules as possible. Is that crap rule book still only available for purchase as well? I hate FED only slightly less btw.

And the association with this crap: http://umpire-empire.com/index.php?/topic/59339-ptc-little-league-fiasco/ I am beyond done with the nonsense. It was my hellhole start, and now I've moved on to greener fields.

So you think "to hell with player safety" ?

And it's OK for a league to break the tournament eligibility rules?

Local rules aren't the fault of the LL rule book. Leave that comment where it belongs.

I told you I understand people not liking the no-lead rule.

Glad you don't do LL.

 

[MooseLoop]

Arbitrary pitcher to catcher vise versa rules, yes no head first slides, 12 year olds playing 8 year old no lead off, counting individual pitches, suggesting umpires throw little red flags.. and a tendency to pack in as many local fool's rules as possible. Is that crap rule book still only available for purchase as well? I hate FED only slightly less btw.

And the association with this crap: http://umpire-empire.com/index.php?/topic/59339-ptc-little-league-fiasco/ I am beyond done with the nonsense. It was my hellhole start, and now I've moved on to greener fields.

How could you have left out the rule allowing starters to re-enter into a different slot of the batting order?

[Rich Ives]

How could you have left out the rule allowing starters to re-enter into a different slot of the batting order?

Been that way forever in LL. Allows much more freedom to max the playing time for subs. It's a good thing. You have to delay the re-entry so it's pretty hard to game it if that thought has crossed your mind.

 

Example:

Adam starts and plays the first two innings.

Joey starts.

Billy subs for Adam in the third and gets his 6 outs and an AB which he has to do before Adam can re-enter..

Having sat out for the required time, Adam now re-enters for Joey in the fifth inning.

Now Adam, Billy, and Joey all have four innings of playing time.

Can't do that if subs and starters are locked into the same slot. If they were paired Adam and Billy would either get three each or 2-4, and Joey would probably be paired with Zach and face the same situation.

[MooseLoop]

How do you keep track of when a starter is subbed out, and whether his sub has an at-bat?  

I write down on my line-up the inning and number of outs next to the starter's name for each substitution (e.g., "3.3" for no outs in the bottom of the third) and wait for a challenge on the issue of an at-bat, which I would then refer to the scorebook if it ever happened which it hasn't.  PITA, and time-consuming, especially important for time limit games.

[Rich Ives]

How do you keep track of when a starter is subbed out, and whether his sub has an at-bat?  

I write down on my line-up the inning and number of outs next to the starter's name for each substitution (e.g., "3.3" for no outs in the bottom of the third) and wait for a challenge on the issue of an at-bat, which I would then refer to the scorebook if it ever happened which it hasn't.  PITA, and time-consuming, especially important for time limit games.

That's as decent method. Not your job unless there's an issue. Then review and decide.