Pickoffs from the windup?

[David Emerling]

Originally posted by bob jenkins

And, IMO, FED got this one "right". That is, if I were designing a new game called "baseball" and if I were trying to decide how to deal with a runner missing a base, I'd allow dead-ball verbal appeals by either the coach or a defensive player (as opposed to just having the umpire call the runenr out, or requiring that a live ball be thrown to the base missed).


I recognize that not all will agree with this. And, to be fair, I think that FED has some of the other rules "wrong" (I prefer the NCAA or the OBR ruling).

FED always(?) gives a reason fopr the changes. We might not agree with the reasons, and the reasons might be lost over the course of time, but the changes are not made just to be "different". The changes are made for the reasons given in previous posts.

I agree - the FED method is not altogether illogical. And - true - if you were inventing a NEW game ... this might be the way to go.

But, nonetheless, it's different! It's different from what most people have grown up watching on TV. At high school games people are often surprised to discover that a runner is out, for missing a base, without an actual PHYSICAL appeal. And, as I said before, at least 50% of the time (or more) the team executes an OBR-style appeal anyway.

The point isn't whether it's "better" - it's that it's needlessly different. It causes confusion. And the reason so many teams don't realize that they can do a verbal appeal is because their higher comfort level (i.e. familiarity) with OBR rules.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN