|
Sun Feb 18, 2001, 01:33am
|
|||
|
|||
|
From the NFHS web site:
SITUATION 14: With runners on first and second and one out, the batter hits a ground ball to the shortstop. The second baseman calls "I got it" and acts as if it is a pop-up. The runners stay at their respective bases and a double play is made, second to first. RULING: This is verbal obstruction. Runners will be awarded third and second. There are two outs since the out on the batter-runner will stand. (2-22-1; 8-3-2) http://www.nfhs.org/rules-baseball.htm P-Sz 
|
|
Sun Feb 18, 2001, 02:14am
|
|||
|
|||
So, whats the problem? If the verbal act of the fielder(s) hindered advancement of the runners(or deked them), under FED rules you got OBSTRUCTION! Play, R2, F6 yells "back-back" as F1 is on rubber coming set, watchya got, Patrick?
|
|
Sun Feb 18, 2001, 02:19am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
But would you honestly call SITUATION 14--the one I posted above--verbal obstruction? I repeat, in the FED's general direction: Give me a break! P-Sz
|
|
Sun Feb 18, 2001, 02:26am
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Patrick, you MUST call it.Consistency is what the FEDS want, thats is all. Plus, they want to simplify umpire judgement, that is obvious.AND, it is considered unsportsmanlike to "deke" in FED ball(safety issue, I guess). Do you think I enjoy balking a F1 for turning his shoulder in the dstretch? Hell no! This is a chicken poop play as well, BUT that is the way it is! Why bust our brain with TOP, for example, if we not gonna call it! I had a problem with a coach a few years ago that pitched a bitch about consistency in the "calling" of FED rules, guy was right. Can you see the light???? [Edited by chris s on Feb 18th, 2001 at 01:32 AM]
|
|
Sun Feb 18, 2001, 10:47am
|
|||
|
|||
I don't really see your point
You are certainly free to NOT make that call as IN YOUR JUDGMENT it may not be obstruction.
I think that the Fed purpose is clear. As this play relates to sportsmanship. They are saying, essentially, that such bush league tactics have no place in Fed baseball, and here is a way to deal with one such tactic. (I've never seen it, anyone?) Remember, in 2001 clinics, and per rulebook, plate meetings must include a short speech about sportsmanship. Obviously, FED considers this play to be unsportsmanlike. Mike Branch EWS Member
|
|
Sun Feb 18, 2001, 03:09pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I don't care if that's coming from the right fielder. It ain't obstruction. P-Sz
|
|
Sun Feb 18, 2001, 03:27pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!! Your telling me to reread? Patrick, the F6 is acting as if it is a pop-up!!!!! The reference to the balk was to show that I do not agree with the FEDs all the time, but, BUBBA, THAT is the way it is.
|
|
Mon Feb 19, 2001, 01:21pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
In Fariness to FED
Patrick said:
Uhh, Chris, Your balk example is unrelated. Please reread the situation. The situation FED presented was as follows: A batter hits a fair grounder. A fielder yells "I got it!". In fairness to FED, lets stick to the real situation, which was: The second baseman calls "I got it" and acts as if it is a pop-up. The runners stay at their respective bases and a double play is made, second to first. See the difference? As one who has had this play, except with R1 only, I do. A ball comes off the bat incredibly fast, everyone is trying to track it. F4 is looking straight up in the air, pounding his glove, dancing in a circle and yelling, I'VE GOT IT, I'VE GO IT. The runner's attention is grabbed by this action and comment and ventures off his bag by no more than six to eight feet waiting for the catch or drop. FED 2-22-1 "Obstruction is an act (intentional or unintentional a well as physical or verbal) by a fielder, any member of the defensive team or its team personnel that hinders a runner or changes the pattern of of play..." Situation 14 seems textbook to me. GB
__________________
GB
|
|
Mon Feb 19, 2001, 03:18pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Patrick Szalapski
From the NFHS web site: SITUATION 14: With runners on first and second and one out, the batter hits a ground ball to the shortstop. The second baseman calls "I got it" and acts as if it is a pop-up. The runners stay at their respective bases and a double play is made, second to first. RULING: This is verbal obstruction. Runners will be awarded third and second. There are two outs since the out on the batter-runner will stand. (2-22-1; 8-3-2) Patrick, I share in your frustration of this example to show the interpretation. It eliminates common sense on behalf of the runners and even the pupose for offensive coaches. It does not mean, however, that we should discount the way the Fed wants this enforced. To Chris S. who indicated it was "unsportsmanlike" to "deke" in Fed ball. I would disagree. A "deke" causing an unnecessary slide would likely be considered unsportsmanlike (and likely a fake tag). However, take this similar situation to that provided in P-sz's post (this occured in one of my games last year): R1 stealing on play where BR pops up a little behind first base. F4, at crack of bat, goes down low into his fielding position as if to prepare for grounder coming his way. R1 continues quickly toward second despite his coaches yelling for him to return. Is this obstruction? Not. This did not include the "verbal" aspects reflected in the Fed's situation. Did F4 "deke" the runner? Absolutely---but not into sliding and not with a fake tag (which would have been obstruction). Is there any infraction here. None whatsoever. When the offensive coach complained I explained "no fake tag, no obstruction, no rule violation, just smart defensive baseball---sorry we disagree, we now need to progress with the game." Agree or disagree----just my opinion, Steve Member EWS
|
|
Mon Feb 19, 2001, 06:49pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hmmm, so a fielder may not verbally impersonate a ...fielder? Bizarre.
OK, to this point I've relied upon the absurdity of this interpretation. Since apparently no one visualizes this play the same way I do, let's look at the logic. There are several types of obstruction this play is not talking about. It does not cover a fake tag or obstruction with the batter before he becomes a runner. It also does not illustrate any physical obstruction. Do you agree? If so, skip the following paragraph. If not, read on. This interpretation is about VERBAL obstruction. Therefore, the whole the point of this interpretation is that the fielder obstructed verbally, not physically. The fielder may be off doing cartwheels or a silent Broadway musical on the infield dirt as long as he doesn't physically hinder a runner. That is, the traditional OBR definition of obstruction also fits as a subset of the FED obstruction defintion. Therefore, let us consider the following example plays which capture all that is relevant in this discussion. PLAY 1: Batter hits a grounder up the middle, on the 3B side of 2B. F4 physically runs over toward where he might be able to field the ball, behind second base. F4 verbally calls out "I've got it". RULING: All square, of course. PLAY 2: Batter hits a grounder up the middle, on the 3B side of 2B. F4 physically stays where he is and looks to the sky. F4 verbally calls out "I've got it". RULING: By the FED case play, this is verbal obstruction. But do you see the inconsistency in the above calls? We call one verbal obstruction, when in fact the only difference between the two is a physical act! I submit there is no difference between the above plays. The fielder is acting legally in both cases. P-Sz [Edited by Patrick Szalapski on Feb 19th, 2001 at 05:53 PM]
|
|
Mon Feb 19, 2001, 07:59pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I might add, correct me if wrong. Simply the act alone, if it does not change/alter the play, it is nothing. This is pertaining to #14, not the "back-back" or simulating coach/ump. What say Garth.....
|
|
Tue Feb 20, 2001, 12:36am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
P-Sz
|
|
Tue Feb 20, 2001, 08:36am
|
|||
|
|||
|
SITUATION 14: With runners on first and second and one out, the batter hits a ground ball to the shortstop. The second baseman calls "I got it" and acts as if it is a pop-up. The runners stay at their respective bases and a double play is made, second to first. RULING: This is verbal obstruction. Runners will be awarded third and second. There are two outs since the out on the batter-runner will stand. (2-22-1; 8-3-2)
Patrick FED is turning baseball into a "sissy sport". In Pop Warner Football do we tell the littile rugrats not to tackle? Of Coarse not. Sooner or later we have to let the kids play REAL BASEBALL . Pretty soon the FED will issue a ruling that says no-one can talk. I agree it's enough already. Part of any game is trying to psyche the other team out. On a ground ball to F6, the runners SHOULD KNOW where the ball is so it wouldn't matter if F4 was standing on his head or not. If these runners are foolish enough to go for the fake - IMO TOO Bad. Pete Booth
__________________
Peter M. Booth
|
|
Tue Feb 20, 2001, 10:22am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Fed --vs-- FEDlandia
I make this same post about three times a year:
The National Federation of High Schools has amended rules in a number of areas. The areas that are most obvious include safety, participation, game time, sportsmanship and "dumb umpire rules". I really think you have to understand the charter of FED to understand what they are trying to accomplish in all sports and other things they control. High School sports vary greatly around the nation. In some areas high school football is nearly a religion . . . other states picture their type of high school basketball is what Dr. Naismith intented the game to be. There are other areas of the U.S. where high school sports take a back seat to AAU type teams. So let's look at the basic rules changes in baseball. PARTICIPATION The DH and re-entry are based on the need for schools to insure participation for all students that particiapte in all types of after hour activities. I don't know about youse guys but I think it is great to let kids play. Now there are coaches that know how to use these rules t their advantage. I like that . . . if all coaches spent time learning rules then this would be an equal play not an "advantage" gained by a few. SPEED UP RULES There are places in the U.S. that document 7 inning games running 3 hours at average. Rules that are adopted (the infamous "stay in the batters box, kid" rule)are always INTENDED to make a game go more smoothly and hopefully faster. As an umpire -- I have always been for fast games, and fast women. SAFETY Before we talk about Patrick's specific play let's just say that the FED believes that the children playing their sports are fine . . . it is just that they all have ATTORNEYS! Face most of the safety rules in all FED sports have developed AFTER a legal proceeding of an injured player (child). Even I have been convinced (by Carl) that the big runner/catcher crash at home plate is NOT necessary to the game of baseball as played by non-professional players. Malicious Contact rules, must slides rules, dekes and fakes all have a basis in the name of safety. SPORTSMANSHIP By the nature of FED alone the entire mission statement is to TEACH sportsmanship, fair play and team competetion. That is the mission of the organization. It may seem silly to some of us that certain rules are developed that seem dumb to an umpire in a cow pasture in Eastern Oregon when the issue was based in East L.A. -- however, the vision of FED is one set of rules for all of school baseball. DUMB UMPIRE RULES Sometimes there are rules that in OBR are just too tough for many of the 100,000 baseball umpires that work FED ruled games during a season. Those who post to site like this ARE NOT the ones that dump the complicated rules . . . all of you by your nature study and understand rules so you "most likely" aren't the ones that screw up Appeal Plays or Batting Out of Order. Folks, there are 25,000 umpires that are new, careless or just putting in time that screw the game up so badly that we are forced to have rulings (i.e. Appeal Play)that seem over officious to us but are simply but in becasue our brethern couldn't do the job right. Now for Patrick: I have read Patrick's posts for about two years. He has always taken a position that "FED is really screwed up!" but placing that aside we need only to look at the example in the book and see WHY to is verbal obstruction: The ruling falls into TWO catagories: safety and sportsmanship. The play clearly defines that the second baseman is attempting to fake a runner into not knowing where the ball actually is. It is CONSISTENT with FED logic that this is both unsafe and unsportsmanlike. If you look at the play from the FED side the ruling is quite clear. There is a defensive player trying to fool an offensive player and it could cause two things to happen: 1) the player, because of indecision, could be injured (i.e. sliding when not necessary, or reversing direction and injuring a body part), 2) on the bigger picture the play supports a VALUE that FED is destine to change. THEY consider it to be unsportsmanlike . . . I do not ask that any of you agree with FED I just point out that when you select to work under their direction the game is "different" than normal ball played under OBR. Patrick, you need to accept the rules or not work that type of game. It is very simple. Sorry for the length of this post. It only comes once a season (or so). [Edited by Tim C on Feb 20th, 2001 at 09:46 AM]
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
