FPSR Video

[Jimurray]

I'm confused about this NCAA Arbiter Video: http://ncaabaseball.arbitersports.com/front/105039/Video/player/13863/16784

They seem to think that the violation was an intentional hand up, which it could have been, but implied that a legal popup slide that results in contact could be a no call which would be correct.  But are they thinking that other than the intentional hand this slide would be legal? I have an illegal slide to the OF side of the bag with contact with the fielder.

[BT_Blue]

@grayhawk possed the same question on FB yesterday in a closed group. We both agreed that not only the hand intentionally being raised, but the slide as well, were grounds enough for FPSR. And were a little confused as to why the video did not mention the illegal slide.

[Replacematt]

I agree as well. I'd hang my hat on the more black-and-white violation of contacting the fielder off the side of the base rather than the more arguable raised hand.

[Jimurray]

If I heard right, the announcer says this appears to be a violation of rule 8-5b. I don't get any connection to that rule. Then goes on to imput that the popup was not a violation. Very strange if they are trying to educate. 

[BT_Blue]

I blame it on it being the off season.

Will probably be cleared up in January.

[Replacematt]

12 hours ago, Jimurray said:

If I heard right, the announcer says this appears to be a violation of rule 8-5b. I don't get any connection to that rule. Then goes on to imput that the popup was not a violation. Very strange if they are trying to educate. 

He referred to 8-5d, which would be correct if the call was based on R1 intentionally using his right hand to hinder F4. 8-4b comes into play because there is an exception to an allowable pop-up slide: "if there is no other movement to interfere with the fielder's play." That intentional movement not related to the slide would fall under that exception.

[johnnyg08]

I lean w/ those who would grab this for altering the play by sliding illegally to the same side of the base as the fielder and altering the play.  In my mind, the hand is the harder sell.

[BT_Blue]

13 hours ago, johnnyg08 said:

I lean w/ those who would grab this for altering the play by sliding illegally to the same side of the base as the fielder and altering the play.  In my mind, the hand is the harder sell.

Though they were emphasising getting the runner for purposely putting his hand in the air on the slide to disrupt the throw from the middle infielder.

[alex7]

On 11/13/2016 at 3:11 AM, BT_Blue said:

Though they were emphasising getting the runner for purposely putting his hand in the air on the slide to disrupt the throw from the middle infielder.

The video does emphasize the hand. The other posters seem to be stating that if they were there, they would likely see and bang the illegal slide to the OF side more than the hand.

[BT_Blue]

2 hours ago, alex7 said:

The video does emphasize the hand. The other posters seem to be stating that if they were there, they would likely see and bang the illegal slide to the OF side more than the hand.

That was the obvious one. And one that I thought was going to be pointed at rather than the hand in the air. The slide is an easier explanation than the hand.

Hence the confusion.