FPSR in LSU/North Carolina Regional

[Thunderheads]

On 6/3/2024 at 3:29 PM, MadMax said:

In a 2-man umpire crew, that likely doesn’t get called, or even noticed. Despite the CCA directive of the PU (in 2-man) aiding the BU by arcing into Fair territory so as to observe 2B while BU has to turn focus to the play at 1B, there’s no way a PU sees this. No, this is only seen by a U3/U2 who is able to focus wholly and fully upon the play – in its entirety – at 2B. Notice, too, that the U2, from a kneeling position, adjusts in a “read step/lean” so as to see the outfield side of the base, and the violating slide. 

THANK GOD I finally found someone who agreed with me!!!!!  On the High School version of this post, ...this is what I've been saying (not in so many words as @MadMaxcan eloquently display) but ....      While this is technically a violation in high school also, ...grabbing this is 2 man is tough!!!!!!

[wolfe_man]

*

[noumpere]

19 minutes ago, wolfe_man said:

So if we were to grab this one at any level, we would point at the runner with our right hand and then our vocal call should be "that's a violation!". 

I shouldn't say 'that's interference' for a violation of the FPSR since it is not technically INT.  Because you know if I say the word 'interference' then the coach is going to argue he never interfered with the throw/play at 2B.

Correct?

I usually said "that's illegal" at the time -- and then reinforced it with 'that's an illegal slide" after the play when going back to repeat it after the play. 

That said, it *is* INT (at least in NCAA), but it's a defined term, not an English term:

c.    Actions by a runner are illegal and interference shall be called if:
1) The runner slides or runs out of the base line in the direction of the fielder;
2) The runner uses a rolling or cross-body slide and either makes contact with
or alters the play of a fielder;
3) The runner’s raised leg makes contact higher than the fielder’s knee when
in a standing position;
4) The runner slashes or kicks the fielder with either leg; or
5) The runner illegally slides toward or contacts the fielder even if the fielder
makes no attempt to throw to complete a play.

 

[Thunderheads]

33 minutes ago, wolfe_man said:

So if we were to grab this one at any level, we would point at the runner with our right hand and then our vocal call should be "that's a violation!". 

I shouldn't say 'that's interference' for a violation of the FPSR since it is not technically INT.  Because you know if I say the word 'interference' then the coach is going to argue he never interfered with the throw/play at 2B.

Correct?

I didnt' say or suggest that you should say 'that's a violation' ... did someone else?

[wolfe_man]

*

[Thunderheads]

1 minute ago, wolfe_man said:

Nope, just asking so I don't do it wrong.   I always figured I'd say "that's interference", but this has me second-guessing it.

@noumpere clarified it for me above, so I'm back to thinking "that's interference" (interference shall be called) is still technically correct to verbalize.

I think he was clarifying what he does for NCAA ....