NCAA FPSR Going in Standing directly to the Base

[Replacematt]

2 hours ago, UmpireFever said:

If you say so. LOL

That's a matter of judgment. I can see if someone thinks he is. However, since I don't think he is, this is not FPSR.

However, we're now at the third time you either can't read or are changing the goalposts, I'm done catering to your trolling.

[UmpireFever]

 

[Thunderheads]

21 minutes ago, UmpireFever said:

 

what a sultry voice!!!!!!! 

[johnnyg08]

14 minutes ago, Thunderheads said:

what a sultry voice!!!!!!! 

😁

[dumbdumb]

just another play into 2nd with pop up slide when attempting to make double play. runner easily beats play into 2nd with quick pop up slide and has his arms outstretched at shoulder height. so, would this only be considered some type of interference if the outstretched arms at shoulder height, were determined as a deliberate and intentional act with the arms by the runner to break up the double play on the throw to first.

start at 10:14

 

 

[Senor Azul]

By rule the pop-up slide is legal in college ball—

2021-2022 NCAA rule 8-4

b. Contact with a fielder is legal and interference shall not be called if the runner makes a legal slide directly to the base and in the baseline extended (see diagram). If contact occurs on top of the base as a result of a “pop-up” slide, this contact is legal.

As for the runner making the safe sign when standing up on the base, I think it is worth discussing as to whether it affected the second baseman’s decision not to throw to first. I wonder if that was what he was arguing afterwards.

[Replacematt]

It's official. Going in standing up is not an infraction in itself.

[zoops]

While I don't think the above play should be FPSR, NCAA needs to put clarifications like this in their rule book.  Putting them in random videos or "Ask Randy" segments just sets umpires up for failure.

[johnnyg08]

20 minutes ago, zoops said:

While I don't think the above play should be FPSR, NCAA needs to put clarifications like this in their rule book.  Putting them in random videos or "Ask Randy" segments just sets umpires up for failure.

While this provides pieces of clarity for perhaps the most literal-minded folks...this isn't a double play ball and I don't see it as a great example...Matt does state that caveat in his post. I don't believe anyone would ever call FPSR on this...in fact I'd go as far to say that there's currently not rule support to call it on a play like this.

I would argue that examples like this muddy the water...because people will connect this play to some of the tougher plays we've been studying. 

That being said...maybe I stand alone? 

 

 

[Replacematt]

1 hour ago, zoops said:

While I don't think the above play should be FPSR, NCAA needs to put clarifications like this in their rule book.  Putting them in random videos or "Ask Randy" segments just sets umpires up for failure.

That is one of the suggestions I'm planning on submitting using the tool. 

Interpretations are stored on Arbiter with no good way of retrieving them or ensuring they're still valid. An annual interpretation guide would be gold.

[zoops]

On 5/9/2022 at 11:03 PM, Matt said:

That is one of the suggestions I'm planning on submitting using the tool. 

Interpretations are stored on Arbiter with no good way of retrieving them or ensuring they're still valid. An annual interpretation guide would be gold.

1000%

[Richvee]

There’s some good FPSR plays in video bulletin #9 for those with arbiter access. 
The last one is particularly interesting where they actually say both a call if INT and a “ no call” can be supported. I think that may also apply to some of the tougher plays we’ve discussed here. 
 

[johnnyg08]

1 hour ago, Richvee said:

There’s some good FPSR plays in video bulletin #9 for those with arbiter access. 
The last one is particularly interesting where they actually say both a call if INT and a “ no call” can be supported. I think that may also apply to some of the tougher plays we’ve discussed here. 
 

That's bizarre to me that it can be both something or nothing. 

That make these things really tough to officiate. 

[Jimurray]

8 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

That's bizarre to me that it can be both something or nothing. 

That make these things really tough to officiate. 

Second waffle this season by them. Know the rule, apply it as best you can. Yes, these plays can be tough to officiate by officials like you that are trying to get it right

[dumbdumb]

7 hours ago, johnnyg08 said:

That's bizarre to me that it can be both something or nothing. 

That make these things really tough to officiate. 

just like those those 1/4" pitches near the strike zone in/out, high/low they keep throwing at you all night.

[johnnyg08]

What I struggle with is that it can be so easy to get down or get out of the way. 

It reads "must slide" yet we're seeing interps of not "must sliding" 

 

 

[Velho]

2 hours ago, dumbdumb said:

just like those those 1/4" pitches near the strike zone in/out, high/low they keep throwing at you all night.

only a problem if your recognition resolution is greater than 1/8" 😂

[johnnyg08]

Okay, I had a chance to review the videos relevant to this discussion and "upon further review" I agree with the NCAA interpretations on all three examples...including the one that's "50/50". 

The three examples indicate that the runner "must slide" or get out of the way!