HBP sequence video on NCAA hub

[The Man in Blue]

2 hours ago, Matt said:

It's an issue when the book is published every two years. There's an issue with the 20-second rule, as well, because the rule published for 2019 includes enforcement situations that are different than the 2020 rule but were not clarified immediately.

Not saying it's right or wrong, but just explaining why it is.

 

I understand your point on the timeliness of some of these things (particularly on a 2-year publish cycle), but to me that is a huge and egregious oversight not to have included that when the replay rules were first introduced.  I also understand that odd things happen which spur interpretations ... But "what you can and cannot do" ranks pretty high on my basic list of questions, particularly when you are changing rules about umpires' actions.  They had a pretty good list of what types of plays could and could not be reviewed, so they did put some thought into that.

On a tangent ... really, in this day and age of primarily electronic communication, is a 2-year publish cycle really acceptable? 

(This is more of my organizational development side coming out than my baseball side.   )

[dumbdumb]

What is difference if the ball goes straight from bat directly to the batters instep and umpire calls foul ball as ball rolls on plate as catcher was reaching for ball and batter had just flinched but everyone stops on hearing foul ball. Trouble is, ball did not hit foot, and after a huddle or with replay it is determined ball did not hit foot. Seems like the answer to both situations is the same. What has been done in the foot situations and catcher could have got an out with a barely fair ball until umpire erroneously killed the play?

[Replacematt]

6 minutes ago, dumbdumb said:

What is difference if the ball goes straight from bat directly to the batters instep and umpire calls foul ball as ball rolls on plate as catcher was reaching for ball and batter had just flinched but everyone stops on hearing foul ball. Trouble is, ball did not hit foot, and after a huddle or with replay it is determined ball did not hit foot. Seems like the answer to both situations is the same. What has been done in the foot situations and catcher could have got an out with a barely fair ball until umpire erroneously killed the play?

The difference is that you have a non-reviewable and non-overturnable (yes, a word now) original call so it would not get to that point. While the call was incorrect, at least there's documented protocol on how to fix it (you don't, period.)

Here, you have a situation that was improperly judged, creating a dead ball, and the facts don't support keeping the original call while the rules and directives don't give either the original call or any others as allowable options.

[Jimurray]

On 2/14/2020 at 4:45 PM, Kevin_K said:

There is no rule reference, but the next question was:

After the ball came off the bat, does the fact that ball landed in fair or foul territory have any bearing on the play per the replay regulations?

The answer provided to that was question was yes.

So if the ball landed in fair territory it would have a bearing on replay regulations, a subsequent call and out, if the defense and batter were not affected by the HBP dead ball signal and the batter was thrown out at 1B?

[Richvee]

9 hours ago, Matt said:

I don't recall that question being on the actual test, but on the hub. I could be wrong, as I was definitely preoccupied when I took it.

Sorry. Double post.

Edited February 19, 2020 by Richvee
Double post

[Richvee]

10 hours ago, Matt said:

I don't recall that question being on the actual test, but on the hub. I could be wrong, as I was definitely preoccupied when I took it.

It was a question in the on line clinic. I got it wrong. As evidenced by the length of this thread I wasn’t the only a little confused. The question the online clinic posed is, "what should the count be on the hitter after going to video review". I answered 2-2. They say the correct answer is 2-1. Unless it's written somewhere that they changed the interp here, they're saying this is a "do-over". 

[beerguy55]

On 2/17/2020 at 12:55 PM, Matt said:

I disagree that it's more complicated. The sentence I quoted restricts the God-rule portion of the clause. Call overturned--you can do whatever you think would have happened, but you cannot call outs.

I'd say it is more complicated when it comes to this particular case, regardless of how it was ultimately ruled/fixed - rightly or wrongly.

If the defense never threw the ball to first your position would be irrefutable.   You can't make up an out that never occurred at all.  However, in the clip the defense continued to play and threw the ball to first..you also have a batter who (it appears) made no attempt to run, and was not going anywhere, well before the ump killed the play...ie. the ump's call did not alter the actions of either team, which is in itself a judgment call. 

That aside - is the correct result of this play truly a "do over"?  

[Replacematt]

1 hour ago, beerguy55 said:

I'd say it is more complicated when it comes to this particular case, regardless of how it was ultimately ruled/fixed - rightly or wrongly.

If the defense never threw the ball to first your position would be irrefutable.   You can't make up an out that never occurred at all.  However, in the clip the defense continued to play and threw the ball to first..you also have a batter who (it appears) made no attempt to run, and was not going anywhere, well before the ump killed the play...ie. the ump's call did not alter the actions of either team, which is in itself a judgment call. 

That aside - is the correct result of this play truly a "do over"?  

I agree with you in principle, but the way I read the clause is that outs can never be called on a subsequent play. That is the plain English of it. Otherwise, there is no reason to include it.

Keep in mind, we have had examples from this source where the plain English did not reflect the intent, so maybe it's something that needs to be reworded.

[Jimurray]

1 hour ago, Matt said:

I agree with you in principle, but the way I read the clause is that outs can never be called on a subsequent play. That is the plain English of it. Otherwise, there is no reason to include it.

Keep in mind, we have had examples from this source where the plain English did not reflect the intent, so maybe it's something that needs to be reworded.

Outs can never be called on a play that you believe might have happened. I think you can let stand plays where outs actually happened in spite of the incorrect call.

[BravoUmp]

In this instance, you have to go by the official NCAA video review guide. I have posted verbatim from the guide issued to NCAA umpires:

9.   Hit By Pitch. Those plays for which there is a possibility that a pitched ball touches a batter, or his clothing. See, e.g., Rule 8.2 (d). Any doubt as to whether a pitched ball hit the bat (as opposed to the batter or his clothing) should be resolved by the Home Plate Umpire at that moment as hitting the bat and not the batter, and the Umpire should declare a fair or foul ball under the circumstances.

Rule Change; 2019-20 8.2d.1

Allows for batter intent to be judged with the use of Instant replay, however the coach is not allowed to argue this ruling.

 

Example 1. A pitch strikes the batter, but the Umpire erroneously rules that the pitch struck the bat instead and rules “foul ball.” The Head Coach on offense appropriately invokes replay and the Crew Chief reverses the call. The Crew Chief shall declare the ball dead at the moment it struck the batter and award bases accordingly.

 

Example 2. A pitch strikes the bat, but the Umpire erroneously rules “hit batter – dead ball.” The Head Coach on defense appropriately invokes replay and the Crew Chief reverses the call. If the ball lands foul, the Crew Chief shall call the ball “foul.”  If the ball landed fair, the Crew Chief, will acknowledge the erroneous call, return all runners to the base occupied and batter to the box, prior to the pitch and nullify the pitch. (The pitch does not count).

 

Example 3. An umpire calls intentional hit by pitch, and rules that the batter should stay in the box and awards a strike.  The offensive coach initiates a challenge or (Crew Chief, if late inning criteria are met). Upon Video Review, it is indisputable that the ball did not hit the batter, however, the ball did go all the way to the backstop.  The Crew Chief will put the batter back in the box, awarding the pitch as ruled (ball or strike) and advance the runners as if the correct call would have been made originally. Should the Crew Chief rule that the runners would not have advanced (ball was in the immediate area of the catcher), then place the runner/s at their original starting position.

 

Example 4. The offensive coach initiates a review or (crew chief), if late inning criteria are met.  Following a call of a foul ball on an up and in pitch that the plate umpire rules to have hit the bat. Upon Video Review the crew chief or centralized replay determines with indisputable video evidence that the ball did hit the batter, but he intentionally tried to get hit.  Even though the defense did not initiate a challenge, the entirety of HBP can be reviewed.  The Crew Chief will determine the appropriate ruling on HBP, all aspects.

 

For the purpose of deciding on HBP, any equipment worn by the batter; helmet, batting glove, or base running mitt etc. or protruding from their pocket, that is struct by the pitch will be considered part of the players uniform and therefore awarded first base, if they did not violate the intentional HBP portion of the rule.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Therefore, if the umpire rules hit by pitch (HBP), and it goes to video replay that it hit the knob of the bat, then you would follow example 2. In this case, the ball was fair, so the correct answer is to nullify the pitch and "do-over".

 

[Jimurray]

8 hours ago, BravoUmp said:

In this instance, you have to go by the official NCAA video review guide. I have posted verbatim from the guide issued to NCAA umpires:

9.   Hit By Pitch. Those plays for which there is a possibility that a pitched ball touches a batter, or his clothing. See, e.g., Rule 8.2 (d). Any doubt as to whether a pitched ball hit the bat (as opposed to the batter or his clothing) should be resolved by the Home Plate Umpire at that moment as hitting the bat and not the batter, and the Umpire should declare a fair or foul ball under the circumstances.

Rule Change; 2019-20 8.2d.1

Allows for batter intent to be judged with the use of Instant replay, however the coach is not allowed to argue this ruling.

 

Example 1. A pitch strikes the batter, but the Umpire erroneously rules that the pitch struck the bat instead and rules “foul ball.” The Head Coach on offense appropriately invokes replay and the Crew Chief reverses the call. The Crew Chief shall declare the ball dead at the moment it struck the batter and award bases accordingly.

 

Example 2. A pitch strikes the bat, but the Umpire erroneously rules “hit batter – dead ball.” The Example 2. A pitch strikes the bat, but the Umpire erroneously rules “hit batter – dead ball.” The Head Coach on defense appropriately invokes replay and the Crew Chief reverses the call. If the ball lands foul, the Crew Chief shall call the ball “foul.”  If the ball landed fair, the Crew Chief, will acknowledge the erroneous call, return all runners to the base occupied and batter to the box, prior to the pitch and nullify the pitch. (Thepitch does not count). Crew Chief shall call the ball “foul.”  If the ball landed fair, the Crew Chief, will acknowledge the erroneous call, return all runners to the base occupied and batter to the box, prior to the pitch and nullify the pitch. (The pitch does not count).

 

Example 3. An umpire calls intentional hit by pitch, and rules that the batter should stay in the box and awards a strike.  The offensive coach initiates a challenge or (Crew Chief, if late inning criteria are met). Upon Video Review, it is indisputable that the ball did not hit the batter, however, the ball did go all the way to the backstop.  The Crew Chief will put the batter back in the box, awarding the pitch as ruled (ball or strike) and advance the runners as if the correct call would have been made originally. Should the Crew Chief rule that the runners would not have advanced (ball was in the immediate area of the catcher), then place the runner/s at their original starting position.

 

Example 4. The offensive coach initiates a review or (crew chief), if late inning criteria are met.  Following a call of a foul ball on an up and in pitch that the plate umpire rules to have hit the bat. Upon Video Review the crew chief or centralized replay determines with indisputable video evidence that the ball did hit the batter, but he intentionally tried to get hit.  Even though the defense did not initiate a challenge, the entirety of HBP can be reviewed.  The Crew Chief will determine the appropriate ruling on HBP, all aspects.

 

For the purpose of deciding on HBP, any equipment worn by the batter; helmet, batting glove, or base running mitt etc. or protruding from their pocket, that is struct by the pitch will be considered part of the players uniform and therefore awarded first base, if they did not violate the intentional HBP portion of the rule.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Therefore, if the umpire rules hit by pitch (HBP), and it goes to video replay that it hit the knob of the bat, then you would follow example 2. In this case, the ball was fair, so the correct answer is to nullify the pitch and "do-over".

 

So the defense gets a strike if the ball landed foul but can’t get a strike or out if the ball landed fair even if they got an out when both offense and defense were not affected by the incorrect call, the OP being debatable regarding whether the batter was affected. 
Either the OP ump was not aware of the instruction to default any doubt to bat contact or he had no doubt. 

[The Man in Blue]

Where the hell was that 3 pages ago!?  

[jms1425]

On 2/20/2020 at 12:28 PM, BravoUmp said:

Example 2. A pitch strikes the bat, but the Umpire erroneously rules “hit batter – dead ball.” The Head Coach on defense appropriately invokes replay and the Crew Chief reverses the call. If the ball lands foul, the Crew Chief shall call the ball “foul.”  If the ball landed fair, the Crew Chief, will acknowledge the erroneous call, return all runners to the base occupied and batter to the box, prior to the pitch and nullify the pitch. (The pitch does not count).

 

 

Therefore, if the umpire rules hit by pitch (HBP), and it goes to video replay that it hit the knob of the bat, then you would follow example 2. In this case, the ball was fair, so the correct answer is to nullify the pitch and "do-over".

 

I was reading the Video Review Regulations, and came across that very passage. I came here to see where my thread had gone, and there it is. I guess after 3 pages we have our answer.

I'm not crazy about it - I'd prefer to at least get a strike - but if that's how they want it called, so be it.....

Thanks, Jimurray.

[Haid D' Salaami]

ok..here's is the deal... The HP umpire called it a HBP, when it was in fact a batted ball, because he ( HP ) called it HBP, we can't assume the batter would have been thrown out. In this play we should leave the ball in play, the the defense make a play, then if you don't have replay you might have to get together and make a ruling ( which is ok)...

this play is a do over, batter come back with the same count.

 

SLow down your timing and let things play out. some of our schools have replay, i just had this exact play happen 2 weekends ago and we went to replay, turns out it did hit the knob..ball rolled foul, so no harm no foul...LOL.

 

here is a great tip for HP umpires, when the batter steps in the box, look at his hands and see how he is holding the bat. if they choke up, then its a good chance it hits the knob, if they are wrapping their finger around the knob, well, it's a good chance it hit the hand. 

[The Man in Blue]

I know this is moot as we have verification the NCAA won’t let an umpire award outs on this ...

But as an exercise of semantics and thought, or since I think that is silly (which doesn’t matter) ...

On the play in the video, it was not an assumption the runner would be thrown out.  The runner was thrown out.  Had the defense not completed the play, or had the runner taken off running immediately and stopped, then I could work with it being an assumption.  However, that was not what happened.  It was a clear put out that the defense had taken away by this interpretation (I will not say rule, as that is also not what the rule book says).  So not only did we not “get it right” initially, we are going to deliberately continue to “not get it right” with this ruling.

As I said, that is moot though.  You are absolutely correct @Haid D' Salaami that the big lesson we should be taking away here is working on our timing of making calls when we have any uncertainty.  If you have doubt, err on the side of being able to make the correct call.  Let it play out, then get together with your partner(s) and decide if you should undo any of the action.

[Replacematt]

On 3/2/2020 at 10:02 AM, The Man in Blue said:

I know this is moot as we have verification the NCAA won’t let an umpire award outs on this ...

But as an exercise of semantics and thought, or since I think that is silly (which doesn’t matter) ...

On the play in the video, it was not an assumption the runner would be thrown out.  The runner was thrown out.  Had the defense not completed the play, or had the runner taken off running immediately and stopped, then I could work with it being an assumption.  However, that was not what happened.  It was a clear put out that the defense had taken away by this interpretation (I will not say rule, as that is also not what the rule book says).  So not only did we not “get it right” initially, we are going to deliberately continue to “not get it right” with this ruling.

As I said, that is moot though.  You are absolutely correct @Haid D' Salaami that the big lesson we should be taking away here is working on our timing of making calls when we have any uncertainty.  If you have doubt, err on the side of being able to make the correct call.  Let it play out, then get together with your partner(s) and decide if you should undo any of the action.

Can the defense put a runner out after time has been called?