FPSR Training Video

[zoops]

I'm guessing they want what was shown in the video called as a violation?  For those without access, bases loaded, ground ball to F5 who throws home with the ball beating the runner by 5-10 feet.  Runner more or less ran right along the foul line, making little effort to avoid being tagged (no slide, no deviating from path) and when the catcher reached to tag him, the ball came free when the glove and runner made contact.  Oh boy what a ____show that would be to call 2 outs there, although it would be the right call.  

[Replacematt]

3 hours ago, zoops said:

I'm guessing they want what was shown in the video called as a violation?  For those without access, bases loaded, ground ball to F5 who throws home with the ball beating the runner by 5-10 feet.  Runner more or less ran right along the foul line, making little effort to avoid being tagged (no slide, no deviating from path) and when the catcher reached to tag him, the ball came free when the glove and runner made contact.  Oh boy what a ____show that would be to call 2 outs there, although it would be the right call.  

No, George specifically stated in the commentary that this was not a violation.

[Jimurray]

2 hours ago, Matt said:

No, George specifically stated in the commentary that this was not a violation.

That's  not what I understood. It was a force play and the runner did not directly slide or peel off or give up.

[jms1425]

2 hours ago, Matt said:

No, George specifically stated in the commentary that this was not a violation.

Here's the play (mp4 file at bottom of this post.)

I think George's comment that "In this case, interference shall not be called" (at the 1:12 mark) is part of the exception he is citing, not in relation to the play.
However, it seems to me that R3 made a move to his left to avoid contact with F2, and that this move might make the exception apply to him. But the point of the NCAA posting this video seems to be that this should have been called interference....

I'm confused now. They need a clarification on this one.
 

FPSR at home.mp4

[johnnyg08]

 

[johnnyg08]

13 hours ago, Matt said:

No, George specifically stated in the commentary that this was not a violation.

I didn't hear it that way. I heard it as him reading the rule to us.

In this clip I think we have the runner not sliding and altering the play. 

 

[zoops]

When I posted, I thought that George was just reading the rule/exception.  After another listen, he did add the italicized to the rule book verbiage:  A runner need not slide directly into a bag as long as the runner slides or runs in a direction away from the fielder to avoid making contact or altering the play of the fielder.  In this case interference shall not be called.   

If he did mean to indicate that the play shown should not be a violation, he certainly could have been clearer.  

[Replacematt]

Got the official word. This is a violation.

[johnnyg08]

9 minutes ago, Matt said:

Got the official word. This is a violation.

Thank you for looking into this just a tad further. 

[Jimurray]

29 minutes ago, Matt said:

Got the official word. This is a violation.

I agree it's a violation. Whether I would have recognized it in real time I don't know. 

[johnnyg08]

4 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

I agree it's a violation. Whether I would have recognized it in real time I don't know. 

I think this is pretty easy to get in real time. I think the confusion lies in the "must slide or peel away" portion of the rule. Essentially, as in this clip, if the runner doesn't slide and he alters the play in any way, we need to grab this. This is great clip because there are a lot of myths and misconceptions around FPSR. Great opportunity to learn.

[Richvee]

You guys think FED would want this called as well? I'd imagine, yes. Great clip telling us (reminding us) that FPSR can be at any base, AND still applies on a tag attempt on the forced runner.

[johnnyg08]

3 minutes ago, Richvee said:

You guys think FED would want this called as well? I'd imagine, yes. Great clip telling us (reminding us) that FPSR can be at any base, AND still applies on a tag attempt on the forced runner.

Good question. I think the Federation (different topic for a different thread) doesn't want players going in standing up to avoid getting hit in the face with a thrown ball. "Get down or get out of the way" would be my best guess. 

[umpstu]

On 3/10/2018 at 8:48 PM, jms1425 said:

Here's the play (mp4 file at bottom of this post.)

I think George's comment that "In this case, interference shall not be called" (at the 1:12 mark) is part of the exception he is citing, not in relation to the play.
However, it seems to me that R3 made a move to his left to avoid contact with F2, and that this move might make the exception apply to him. But the point of the NCAA posting this video seems to be that this should have been called interference....

I'm confused now. They need a clarification on this one.
 

FPSR at home.mp4

I think your second sentence is the correct answer.  He was stating that if the runner was in the legal guidelines of the fpsr then there will be no interference.

[White47]

So would this be called the same in Fed?

[noumpere]

1 minute ago, White47 said:

So would this be called the same in Fed?

Yes.

 

I've had (too) many discussions over the years on this play (well, usually about the similar play happening at second) with other umpires who put way too much stock in the phrase "a runner is never required to slide" from the rule (or maybe case) book.  It's kind of like the "a pitcher can't throw to an unoccupied base" phrase -- not enough read the rest of the rule to which that applies.

[zoops]

I don't disagree that it's a violation but I think the chances you'll be writing an ejection report are pretty high if you call it.  

[Replacematt]

44 minutes ago, zoops said:

I don't disagree that it's a violation but I think the chances you'll be writing an ejection report are pretty high if you call it.  

Thankfully, those reports end up in front of the same people who are creating the video.

[zoops]

1 hour ago, Matt said:

Thankfully, those reports end up in front of the same people who are creating the video.

Very true.  Conflicts and EJ's are just part of the gig sometimes.  Kind of like nailing a pitch on the outside corner for strike 3 or getting a banger on the bases in the last inning of a must-win game; you are probably going to hear about it even though you made a great call.