[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Bfair
[B][QUOTE]
Originally posted by BenGilli
I had a situation last year, where a runner advanced to second base on a passed ball. Once he reached second, the short stop, said, that was a foul ball, you gotta go back to first... the runner then looks at me, and I tell him to stay put, but he heads to first and is thrown out.. I didn't call anything but the out, not sure if i should have given him second base.. This was a teener league game.. let me know what you think. Thanks!!
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Carl Childress
Ben: You did everything you could -- and the player still headed back: He's out!
In high school FED play what the shortstop said is "verbal obstruction," and the runner stays at second: He doesn't have the option to return.
Of course, in my games I always contradicted the fielder when he tried that nonsense. Some umpires will tell you it's not your business.
Don't listen to them. Continue to do just that way.
F6 says: "Hey, Buddy, foul ball."
You say: "No, Buddy, passed ball. You've got second."
Good job. Your instincts are good. Keep at it.
__________________________________________________ __________
I thought I would take the liberty of snipping Bfair's follow-up to Carl's post
Quote:
If this is verbal obstruction in Fed, must not the runner be awarded a minimum of one base beyond his position on base when the obstruction occurred? If he were on 2nd, as was stated, would you not be required by Fed rule to award third base if, indeed, obstruction is enforced?
Did you really enforce this, and if you really did, shouldn't it have been done properly instead of how you elected to do it? Of course, it could be it only happens to you in OBR and never in Fed games---but likely not as you say he stays at 2nd for Fed. Which is right?...
|
negative comment deleted.
Quote:
|
I am also questioning, if allowed, why in OBR you say you would interject yourself. Can you cite the "official interpretation" or J/R or JEA which instructs you to do so? If verbal obstruction is not prohibited at higher levels, it seems you may have just taken away an excellent play by the shortstop (especially if the runner is criminally stupid enough to listen to him)...
|
Although I no longer do high school ball I immediately thought Carl's was mistaken on verbal interference keeping the runner at second base. I also wonder how Steve can describe it as an excellent play when in order for it to work it takes a runner who is "criminally stupid" enough to listen. I hadn't given it much thought because at higher levels I can't recall seeing this bush league play. Yes, runners should rely on their coaches or ask the umpire directly but I would probably do it exactly the way Carl described he handled it. I don't think if it happened at a base where he was not stationed he would "interject" himself as Bette Midler sings "from a distance".
On one level you have Carl admitting he was wrong and then also exhibiting why a
rules book at all costs umpire might have difficulty in some of their games. What I don't understand is why Steve's posts have to be flavored with challenges and extra comments. To my knowledge no Emperor ever admits to his followers that he is wrong. Therefore going forward let's remember just like each of us Mr. Childress is capable of error. We all make mistakes. It is only when we use the experience to shape future behvior that we grow. Jim/NY