Naia
 

Check out this link. It looks to me that a rotation was on where PU was going to 3rd, but is he out of position and hence the collision? Or was this just bad luck?

I Dont work many (if any) 3+ umpire games, just 1 or 2 usually, so this is interesting to me.



https://twitter.com/twitter/statuses/996498192001728512

This is exactly why PU should cross into the cutout when he approaches 3B. I would use the "God" clause (not sure of the NAIA citation) and place the runner back at third.

You would be in good, I mean bad, company with an NCAA D1 umpire who called obstruction on himself and awarded the tangled runner 2B in a game at College Station in 2007. Rumor has it that NCAA was not unhappy about that rule kick. How NAIA would deal with your rule kick might depend on whether there was a protest.

If the play started with R2, there should NOT be a rotation by PU. He should stay at the plate, and U1 and U3 reverse rotate. If the play started with R1, then PU should have mirrored R1, arriving at 3B about same time that R1 rounded 2B, been waiting at 3B, in foul territory for any play at 3B.

CCA has you take the play either in or out. The problem was he was late getting there, probably because R1 was stealing on the pitch. When I have a rotation to 3B in 2, 3, or 4 man I will brief my partners that I might be staying home if they hear "going".

Not a chance in hell to either of those.

On this play, going to the cutout may interfere with a throw going home and it's an inferior angle for a play at third. Once PU realizes there is no play at third, it's best to move up the line and slightly deeper into foul territory, because he's got no other responsibilities on this other than if there's a rundown back into third.

Placing the runner back at third has already been addressed.