Ending game in middle of a play

[mackmor]

Last night my son's majors Little League team played a game in which showers/rain fell in the last 2 innings. My son's team was at bat and down by one run with a man on third, the opposing pitcher threw his pitch which was a passed ball and our player ran home safely to tie the game...or so we thought. The Umpire threw up his hands saying he had called the game once the pitch passed the catcher and that the run did not count. His reason: he said he had seen lightening after the pitch was released. Is it legal for an Umpire to allow one half of a play, the pitch, but not the completion of the play, the run, while the ball is still in play? We are all perplexed at this call. Kind of like having a pop out, but not allowing a tag up at home to count or letting a single count, but not allowing a runner on second to advance home on it. Your help please. Thanks.

[TriggerMN]

The umpire should have either allowed the entire play, or allowed none of it, depending on when he felt time should have been called.

That said, I don't know about your league rules, but depending on the inning and the situation, it may or may not have been an official game at the time the game was called.

[jicecone]

The umpire did what he thought was proper for the safety of the player and personnel on the field. That fact that the run counted or didn't count was of little significance, except to the parents or yourself, of the losing team.

And for those posters that are going to state that I should go easy on a parent that is just asking a resonable question, save it. Anyone that puts the score of a LL game above the safety of the players, is not reasonable.

[MD Longhorn]

jice, I'm usually one to come down fiercely on the side of safety as well... but this one seems to be quite far afield.

I don't think the poster had any desire to ignore the safety of the players --- all the events described had already occurred, and weren't going to be more or less safe based on whatever decision the umpire made.

I can't imagine ANY situation where what this umpire did makes any sense. If there was lightning, and the lightning was close enough to be a danger, then the whole play didn't count. If it was not so close as to be an immediate danger, it couldn't hurt to let the play complete before stopping play. In either case, you can't do it halfway.

[johnSandlin]

Don't get me wrong, lightning is lightning, and by rule at all levels of baseball, when lightning is visible and close, you(umpire) are to stop the game IMMEDIATELY!!! However, you cannot do it in made stride of the play.

Once the ball left the pitcher's hand, then that play has to be completed to its fullest, and then stop the game if lightning was spotted while the play was in progress.

In my opinion,(based on what I have read) this umpire pulled a "fast one", because of that run being a tied score. He used his power as an umpire the wrong way, which is not fair to the any of the players of any of the teams.

But, safety is the most important issue here, it was just enforced incorrectly.

[Jerry]

Seems simple enough to me. Once an umpire signals/verbalizes "Time", all play ceases and no runner may advance or any other action be completed.

Suppose, for argument's sake, R3 instead of scoring was caught in a rundown between 3rd and Home. How long would you/should you allow play to continue . . . considering lightning was striking?

What if R3 didn't even attempt to score after the "passed ball"; the outcome would be the same . . . all play ceased at the moment the Umpire declared "Time".

I suspect in the scenario given, U1 didn't even consider where R3 was or what he was doing; he saw the pitch, saw lightning and called the game. A responsibility which belongs to him alone.

Jerry

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Originally posted by Jerry
Seems simple enough to me. Once an umpire signals/verbalizes "Time", all play ceases and no runner may advance or any other action be completed.

...

I suspect in the scenario given, U1 didn't even consider where R3 was or what he was doing; he saw the pitch, saw lightning and called the game. A responsibility which belongs to him alone.

Jerry

Possibly, but ending in the middle of a play is a suspicious and unusual act. I'm suspecting more along the line of Sandlin's reasoning.

We say that at the first sight of lightning we clear the field "immediately." However we all know it takes time to clear the field - 5-10 seconds for the outfielders to get off the field. It seems unreasonable to me that an umpire would kill play in the middle of an impending score and say 'POOF' everyone has got to be off the field. Why not allow the 5-10 seconds of impending play to ensue and then tell everyone to get off the field?

Obviously, it is either a delay due to lightning (and the pitch cannot count - in my mind you can't stop with the escape of the passed ball) or you end the game and the score must revert to that of the last completed inning. No way would I say that it was acceptable to only allow 1/2 the play - count the pitch but not the score. Uh-uh!

[jicecone]

I agree that mabey this wasn't handled according to Holye and that given an official with more experience and knowledge of officiating the game, it would have been handled differently. But, this was a LL game. Chances are the official was not a seasoned veteran and handled it in a manner commensurate with his experience.

"I see lightning, all thinking stops, game is over." I will guess, that's what actually took place.

[Jerry]

Not speaking as a lawyer; simply common sense. You may take it for what it's worth.

Lightning takes precedence over any other reason for curtailing a game. Those are the paraphrased words from the National Federation and is, in fact, in writing.

Stop and think for a quick moment . . . this is a youth game. An umpire see lighting and IMMEDIATELY stops play.

What possible defense would he have, had he let the play continue and anyone on the field or in the stands be injured due to lightning?

Stop and think for a longer moment . . . this is still the same youth game.

Didn't U1 already have it in his power to suspend or end the game earlier? While it was still raining? Had he wanted to favor one team over another (by disallowing the so-called "run"), he could have done it two innings sooner by calling it a rainout.

Without hearing directly from the person involved, I suspect U1 had no concern about who won/lost/tied the game. He was sincere in his invoking the "I saw lightning" rationale and getting folks off the field immediately.

No offense intended, Tony, but I think you're reading a whole lot more into the ruling than what was intended.

Jerry

[MD Longhorn]

I just can't imagine any instance where you would stop the play in the MIDDLE of a play. It opens up way to many worms. Consider other plays - batter hits and is rounding first, you then see lightning. Do you stop it right there? Of course not. Or in the situation described, he sees the lightning a split second earlier, while the pitch is in the air - do you stop it right then? I don't, but what if you do... do you rule on whether the ball would have been a strike or ball had it reached the plate? What if the batter hits it... or it hits the batter.

Just too many cans of worms. You can't end it in the middle of the play.

I suppose that we must assume that this was the very first lightning sighting... if there was some distance between the lightning and the field, surely you could let the play conclude. However, again giving benefit of the doubt to the umpire, and given the assumption that in any given storm, there must be a FIRST lightning and that first lightning must appear close to something ... so let's assume it appeared right on top of the park. Even in that extreme case, if it was so close that safety would be at risk if you didn't stop play literally immediately (like it seems he did), then I'd have to say that NONE of the play would count. No pitch, in essence. I can't even fathom an occurence that would cause you to stop play in the middle.

[Jerry]

"Do you stop it right there? Of course not."

Mike,
That's exactly what the Little League umpire did . . . and in my opinion what should have been done. There are a myriad of examples and case law to support immediate cessation of the game. Since you're also citing hypotheticals, let's suppose a minor child was hit violently in the face with a thrown baseball, bleeding profusely and suffering an immediate stroke. Do you, as the officiating and responsible authority on the field, allow the play to continue or do you immediately call "TIME" and summon emergency assistance? Again . . . we're talking amateur and under-age youngsters.

Now we have a written guideline that says, "A game is to be immediately suspended at the sighting of lightning, etc." You still allow play to continue? Again I must ask, what possible defense would you have in the event someone got injured because you arbitrarily allowed a play to continue knowing full well you're in conflict with "prudent and reasonable" precautions?

Suppose again it was an uncaught 3rd strike . . . and the ball is being thrown all over God's creation while the batter is scampering around the bases . . . while lightning continues to strike the entire area. I feel the umpire did exactly what he should have done to prevent injury to players and spectators. And following the guidelines of immediately getting folks to shelter.

Jerry

[JJ]

This is a case where it's easy to see the outcome, but impossible to see the motivation. Lightning is one thing that really scares me on a ballfield (fastballs, breaking balls, knuckleballs, ground balls and fly balls do, too )
I will never fault an umpire in a baseball game for stopping play at any time when he feels lightning is that threatening. Even in the middle of a play, and especially at the lower levels. If such an action leads to a protest, so be it. At least all the principals will be able to testify, and the umpire will be able to look himself in the mirror.

[SC Ump]

Originally posted by mackmor
My son's team was at bat and down by one run with a man on third...

Please remember, it's just a little league game!

The next time you see that umpire, buy him a coke, offer him a rag to wipe the sweat off his brow and tell him, "I am so greatful that we have people working in this organization that put the kid's lives in more regard than the letter of the law concerning the outcome of some meaningless game."