Overrun first; feint to second

[umpyre007]

OBR 7.08(j): Any runner is out when he fails to return at once to first base after overrunning or oversliding that base. If he attempts to run to second he is out when tagged. If, after overrunning or oversliding first base he starts toward the dugout, or toward his position, and fails to return to first base at once, he is out, on appeal, when he or the base is tagged.

Question: Under OBR rules could a runner that makes only a head feint towards second base be judged by the umpire as now being in jeopardy of being tagged out? If not, do additional physical "feinting" mechanisms have to be put into effect by the runner to be in jeopardy? If a runner cannot be tagged out for feinting towards second base then at what point is he considered to be "attempts to run" as noted in the rule?

[Ump20]

Originally posted by umpyre007
OBR 7.08(j): Any runner is out when he fails to return at once to first base after overrunning or oversliding that base. If he attempts to run to second he is out when tagged. If, after overrunning or oversliding first base he starts toward the dugout, or toward his position, and fails to return to first base at once, he is out, on appeal, when he or the base is tagged.

Question: Under OBR rules could a runner that makes only a head feint towards second base be judged by the umpire as now being in jeopardy of being tagged out? If not, do additional physical "feinting" mechanisms have to be put into effect by the runner to be in jeopardy? If a runner cannot be tagged out for feinting towards second base then at what point is he considered to be "attempts to run" as noted in the rule?

A "feint" can be interpreted as an "attempt" such as "dipping the shoulder". It is not necessary that the runner take a step toward second. In fact it may be possible that he takes a step toward second as part of overruning first base. Jim/NY

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by umpyre007
OBR 7.08(j): Any runner is out when he fails to return at once to first base after overrunning or oversliding that base. If he attempts to run to second he is out when tagged. If, after overrunning or oversliding first base he starts toward the dugout, or toward his position, and fails to return to first base at once, he is out, on appeal, when he or the base is tagged.

Question: Under OBR rules could a runner that makes only a head feint towards second base be judged by the umpire as now being in jeopardy of being tagged out? If not, do additional physical "feinting" mechanisms have to be put into effect by the runner to be in jeopardy? If a runner cannot be tagged out for feinting towards second base then at what point is he considered to be "attempts to run" as noted in the rule?

U7, the following Professional interpretation from JEA 7.08(j) may help you with this issue:

"Professional Interpretation: Simply turning toward 2nd base shall not be interpreted as making an attempt to run to 2nd. This is a judgment call by the umpire. However, a single step or head feint may be interpreted as an attempt to advance (umpire's judgment). The umpire must be convinced that the runner made some movement which indicated that he might try to advance to 2nd." {my underline}

The original intent of this rule appears to have been to ALLOW the batter-runner to continue to advance to 2nd without first having to retouch 1st base after overrunning, but also removing his exemption from jeopardy in overrunning if he elected to continue to 2nd, whether or not he actually continued to that base. Bottom line here is, IMHO, that the umpire must consider the runner's obvious INTENT when making his judgement decision. Turning toward 2nd after overrunning is NOT, by itself, interpreted as an attempt to advance BUT turning toward 2nd with intent to advance MAY BE such an attempt in the umpire's judgement. There is no difference in the action here, but only in the intent accompanying the action. This is VERY difficult to judge, but the consolation is that it is purely a judgement decision and so not protestable.

Cheers,

[Carl Childress]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by umpyre007
Question: Under OBR rules could a runner that makes only a head feint towards second base be judged by the umpire as now being in jeopardy of being tagged out? If not, do additional physical "feinting" mechanisms have to be put into effect by the runner to be in jeopardy? If a runner cannot be tagged out for feinting towards second base then at what point is he considered to be "attempts to run" as noted in the rule?

Originally posted by Warren Willson, quoted from Jim Evans:"Professional Interpretation: Simply turning toward 2nd base shall not be interpreted as making an attempt to run to 2nd. This is a judgment call by the umpire. However, a single step or head feint may be interpreted as an attempt to advance (umpire's judgment). The umpire must be convinced that the runner made some movement which indicated that he might try to advance to 2nd."

Warren: Jim's recitation of the professional interpretation is very good for that level. I have my own guideline that has worked very well in the Youth Leagues where I have been the UIC.

Some FED coaches in my area were either managers, business managers, or "nofficial," official advisers to Pony, Inc., teams. Those FED guys were perfectly aware that the high school rule included "feint" while OBR says "attempt." "That was a feint; he didn't try to go" was a common complaint from those skippers.

So I devised the "traveling rule." After the kid sees the ball get away, he may take one step toward second; but if he "travels" (that is, if he then lifts his pivot foot), he has made an attempt and is jeopardy of an out. I have always observed that the easier you make the job for the kids when they are starting out to officiate, the more likely you are to keep them in our fraternity.

Bottom line, though: It's umpire judgment, as you say.

BTW: Just in case someone "misunderstands": The one step travel rule does not cover the case where the kid simply turns to the right to hustle back toward first. There, he might make two or three steps toward second without being in jeopardy.

After overrunning a base, B-R's do one of four things: They:

1. return to the base, turning either to the left or the right;
2. stop to locate the ball;
3. hesitate while deciding whether to return or advance;
4. feint an attempt to try to create an error; or
5. light out for second.

It's the difference between numbers 4 and 5 that creates the need for guidelines.

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by Carl Childress
So I devised the "traveling rule." After the kid sees the ball get away, he may take one step toward second; but if he "travels" (that is, if he then lifts his pivot foot), he has made an attempt and is jeopardy of an out. I have always observed that the easier you make the job for the kids when they are starting out to officiate, the more likely you are to keep them in our fraternity.

Bottom line, though: It's umpire judgment, as you say.

Sounds pretty cool to me, Carl. So to recap, if the BR overruns 1st base, turns toward 2nd pivoting on his left foot, takes a step in any direction with his other foot and THEN plants his pivot foot in the direction of 2nd, he is making an "attempt to advance". If, however, his pivot foot is planted in the direction of 1st, he is simply returning. Do I have it right?

I dislike trying to decide the INTENT of a player if I can use some other legitimate means to make a decision instead. This sounds like a pretty good rule of thumb at the amateur "youth league" level of play.

Cheers,

[PeteBooth]

Originally posted by Carl Childress

Papa C question? This happened to me last year Hudson Valley Youth Division 18 and under - FED rules.

Sitch: R1, BR singles to left. BR makes turn (left turn) but IMO judgement makes no attempt to go to second. Defensive coach yells to F3 TAG HIM! TAG HIM! HE ATTEMPTED ! The BR hearing this now starts to run because of the coaches actions he thinks he is in jeopardy of being put out.

I'm the BU and called time immediately and put BR back at first. R2 was in between 2nd and third at the time, so I put him back on second.

I took some heat from the defensive manager. Hey Blue this isn't LL, etc. I realize now that this was upper ball, but the BR only started running towards second after he heard the defensive coach. Hey wasn't my best day.

For future reference, what is the proper coarse of action in the aforementioned situation? Thanks

Pete Booth

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by PeteBooth
Originally posted by Carl Childress

Papa C question? This happened to me last year Hudson Valley Youth Division 18 and under - FED rules.

Sitch: R1, BR singles to left. BR makes turn (left turn) but IMO judgement makes no attempt to go to second. Defensive coach yells to F3 TAG HIM! TAG HIM! HE ATTEMPTED ! The BR hearing this now starts to run because of the coaches actions he thinks he is in jeopardy of being put out.

I'm the BU and called time immediately and put BR back at first. R2 was in between 2nd and third at the time, so I put him back on second.

I took some heat from the defensive manager. Hey Blue this isn't LL, etc. I realize now that this was upper ball, but the BR only started running towards second after he heard the defensive coach. Hey wasn't my best day.

For future reference, what is the proper coarse of action in the aforementioned situation? Thanks

Pete Booth

Pete:
In Youth Ball at the lower levels, when that happened, I would simply yell: "Time!" When the coach asked: "Who wanted time?" I would say: "Hell, I did. I had a cramp in my foot." Believe me, I used to get away with a lot of stuff.

On the other hand, at older levels. where the kids might shave next year and above, I'd keep that kid out. It's his coach's fault for not telling him to walk back to the base.

(How's that for coming down on both sides of your question?)

[umpyre007]

FED: BR can overrun first base as long as he does not attempt or feint an attempt to second.

NCAA: The BR can overrun first base and can ONLY be tagged out when he makes an actual attempt (NOT on a feint) to go to second base.

OBR: The BR can ALSO overrun first base and can ONLY be tagged out when he makes an actual attempt (NOT on a feint) to go to second base.

Have I gotten this right?

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by umpyre007
FED: BR can overrun first base as long as he does not attempt or feint an attempt to second.

NCAA: The BR can overrun first base and can ONLY be tagged out when he makes an actual attempt (NOT on a feint) to go to second base.

OBR: The BR can ALSO overrun first base and can ONLY be tagged out when he makes an actual attempt (NOT on a feint) to go to second base.

Have I gotten this right?

Yes, as far as "overrun" goes. "Over-walk" is a different matter altogether.

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by umpyre007
OBR: The BR can ALSO overrun first base and can ONLY be tagged out when he makes an actual attempt (NOT on a feint) to go to second base.

Have I gotten this right?

Except that the Pro interpretation of OBR allows that a head feint MAY be judged an attempt to advance, vide the Evans interpretation I quoted earlier.

BTW, why did you poke your tongue out at Carl?

Cheers,

[umpyre007]

[B]

Originally posted by umpyre007
FED: BR can overrun first base as long as he does not attempt or feint an attempt to second.

NCAA: The BR can overrun first base and can ONLY be tagged out when he makes an actual attempt (NOT on a feint) to go to second base.

OBR: The BR can ALSO overrun first base and can ONLY be tagged out when he makes an actual attempt (NOT on a feint) to go to second base.

Have I gotten this right?

Childress: Yes, as far as "overrun" goes. "Over-walk" is a different matter altogether.

Willson: Except that the Pro interpretation of OBR allows that a head feint MAY be judged an attempt to advance, vide the Evans interpretation I quoted earlier.


Me thinks that there is a problem here! Which is it???

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by umpyre007
Childress: Yes, as far as "overrun" goes. "Over-walk" is a different matter altogether.

Willson: Except that the Pro interpretation of OBR allows that a head feint MAY be judged an attempt to advance, vide the Evans interpretation I quoted earlier.


Me thinks that there is a problem here! Which is it???

I'm disappointed! Does this mean you DIDN'T read my first post in this thread? It was the 3rd post in the entire thread, which is still only 1 page long, and it hasn't been deleted so it shouldn't be hard to find. In it you will find the correct PRO interpretation for OBR, quoted from JEA.

Carl, OTOH, offered an alternative view purely for amateur youth leagues using OBR.

The two interpretations certainly are different, with respect to the "head feint". Since the bottom line in enforcing this particular rule is "umpire judgement", as is clearly stated in the interpretations - both the PRO interpretation and Carl's amateur youth league alternative - I guess that means it quite possibly could be ... BOTH!

Cheers,

[umpyre007]

Originally posted by Warren Willson

I'm disappointed! Does this mean you DIDN'T read my first post in this thread? It was the 3rd post in the entire thread, which is still only 1 page long, and it hasn't been deleted so it shouldn't be hard to find. In it you will find the correct PRO interpretation for OBR, quoted from JEA.

Carl, OTOH, offered an alternative view purely for amateur youth leagues using OBR.

The two interpretations certainly are different, with respect to the "head feint". Since the bottom line in enforcing this particular rule is "umpire judgement", as is clearly stated in the interpretations - both the PRO interpretation and Carl's amateur youth league alternative - I guess that means it quite possibly could be ... BOTH!

Cheers,

So...Mr. Childress' explanation is based on amateur speculation [what's right and good for a specific level of players and/or training of younger umpires] while Mr. Willson's explanation is based upon authoritative opinion and/or official interpretation? Surely, we can't have it both ways?

When previously lurking I saw way too much bandwidth used to vehemently debate similar rules aspects with no real "winner" and many hard feelings. I am starting to see way too much veering from recognized official interpretations and authoritative opinion which is really starting to muddy the umpiring waters. Shoot...if this keeps up this board will be comprised purely of neo-romanticists.

Please, Mr. Administrator...perhaps it is time to close this thread before feelings start to get hurt.

[umpyre007]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Warren Willson

BTW, why did you poke your tongue out at Carl?

I meant no harm. The smilie just looked so cute, like one of those Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.

[Ump20]

Originally posted by umpyre007

So...Mr. Childress' explanation is based on amateur speculation [what's right and good for a specific level of players and/or training of younger umpires] while Mr. Willson's explanation is based upon authoritative opinion and/or official interpretation? Surely, we can't have it both ways?

When previously lurking I saw way too much bandwidth used to vehemently debate similar rules aspects with no real "winner" and many hard feelings. I am starting to see way too much veering from recognized official interpretations and authoritative opinion which is really starting to muddy the umpiring waters. Shoot...if this keeps up this board will be comprised purely of neo-romanticists.

Please, Mr. Administrator...perhaps it is time to close this thread before feelings start to get hurt.

I read the posts by Warren in which he cited the official OBR ruling on an umpire -- determining whether a "feint" to second is an "attempt". I also read Carl's "practical guide" to use in youth leagues when a coach unwittingly tells the runner to go to second when the first baseman begins to chase him because let's say he turned the wrong way. I'm not sure I'll use Carl's approach but I can see where I might. I particularly liked the fact that in a youth league game he would call "time" and say he had something in his eye.

This might be real confusing to someone relatively new to umpiring. I mean "the book says" yet Carl Childress, an expert authority is suggesting you might choose not to impose that rule. I think it is not about picking one piece of advice over another. I think it is all about game control at different levels. There is one thing I have changed my mind about in the last two or three years is that "You know you did a good job when no one notice you". I think that you come to the field with the mindset that not a single fan came to see me umpire yet you think that your Dad or Mom or someone you really cared about while growing up is sitting there watching you perform your job as umpire and when you leave that field you see that person sitting behind home plate with the widest smile you can imagine knowing full well that you did the best job you could possibly do.

If you're still in doubt go with OBR and the "book". You really can't be wrong but be prepared to change and evolve as you grow as an umpire. I hope this makes some sense but again it is just my opinion. I would also like to award Warren with this month's Most Smiley's In One Post Award with three! Jim Simms/NYC