R2 is stealing third base and slides in safely. The ball gets away from the 3B and rolling in foul territory. R2 immediately asks for time not realising that the ball has gotten away.

Should I a) ignore his request because the play is not over or b) grant him time because he is only hurting himself.

BTW, there were no other runners on base.

I wouldn't grant time until the potential for any further play is over. To me that usually means a fielder is in possession of the ball in the infield and no runner is attempting to advance.

So in your case, NO!

never grant time if/when the ball is not in your control or the defense.

<i> Originally posted by Jay R </i>

<b> R2 is stealing third base and slides in safely. The ball gets away from the 3B and rolling in foul territory. R2 immediately asks for time not realising that the ball has gotten away.

Should I a) ignore his request because the play is not over or b) grant him time because he is only hurting himself.

BTW, there were no other runners on base. </b>

I disagree with the others.

When is playing action over?

In this play there were NO OTHER runners to worry about and R2 was NOT going ANYWHERE and requested TIME, therefore, Grant it.

Why keep the play alive because the offense was not smart.

If there are other runners to worry about, then I say allow play to continue, but in this case we only had to worry about R2 so if he wants time then so be it.

Pete Booth

If the ball is in the umpire's control, the ball is dead.

Bob

True in FED, not in OBR.

FED 5-1-1h "... the umpire handles a live ball"

OBR 5.10(e) "... an umpire calls "time" ... when the umpire wishes to handle the ball"

(I think the NCAA rule is the same as OBR.)

Every once in a while, you'll see something strange happen in a MLB game when the umpire handles the ball w/out calling "Time." For the next several games, you'll see the umpires being very obvious about calling "Time" before tehy handle the ball.

Sorry, Pete - but I have to disagree on both philosophical and practical grounds.

"In this play there were NO OTHER runners to worry about and R2 was NOT going ANYWHERE and requested TIME, therefore, Grant it."
This is the philosphical part: I do not grant Time just 'cause some participant requests it.

In my neck of the woods, EVERY time a kid slides into a base, I've got a Coach yelling: "Call Time!" The ball could be in center field or the next county over. I've got coaches wanting the Batter to "call Time" if they think F1 is "taking too long" [mind you - the 20 sec. haven't passed yet] to decide if it's gonna be a pitch or pick. Sorry, guys: you get Time if it's needed for some legit reason, but in BB the default condition is the ball is live & in play.


Now here's the practical part:

I'm keeping the ball live 'cause the O may be not merely "not smart", they may be positively idiotic, and do something that produces one of my required 39-42 outs: OR the D may compound the existing error and kick the ball into DBT or o/w do something compelling a base award. While I would not MIND explaining to R's Coach that the reason he wasn't awarded Home was that his runner asked for and received Time before the event happened, a Coach that knows the rules and mechanics [the very worst kind] would certainly chide me for granting Time before all playing action was completed.

No way I am calling time until the defensive player has ball in hand and that there will be no further play. The baserunner may have called time but about the time you call time he may then decide to take off at the urging of his coach. Then you'll have an argument/ejection/headache/loss of backside for calling time with the ball not in control of a player.

Yes, and "time" is automatic. Would you handle the ball, and let it remain "live"? And, why would the ball be "live" if an umpire handles the ball, even without "time" being called. It's implied.

Bob

Is this a legitimate question? Really?

1. Of course NOT. You can't/don't call time with a live ball rolling around in live ball territory with runners on base.

2. ARRGHHH!!! Did someone already say, "Sure, go ahead, its only hurting the runner? Was that a joke?

I wouldn't handle it on purpose, no.

But take this play:

R3, one out. BR grounds to F3 who steps on first. Thinking it was three outs, he tosses the ball to BU who instinctively catches it. R3 holds while F3 trots toward the dugout. Ruling: FED: Dead ball. R3 returns. OBR: The umpire should drop the ball and it remains live. R3 can try to advance.

It's not "automatic time" when an umpire handles the ball under OBR.

I don't like that though because example there is a second base umpire (BU. The batter hits a line drive no chance for a play by second or short stop. The ball would roll out for an easy single and close double, however the line drive is so fast the BU has no time to duck or move and it hits him. second base gets the ball that was knocked down and then throws the runner out at first. See what i mean?

If F4 or F6 had a play on the ball originally and were unable to make one afterward, it would be just as "unfair". Killing the play and awarding bases/outs would probably involve ejections as the HC\'s would clearly have differing views about how the play would have ended up.

John Prideaux

dumbrumb - there is an enormous difference between an umpire contacted by a batted or thrown ball and an umpire who finds himself in POSSESSION or CONTROL of the ball. The latter is the one at issue in this thread.

umpire interference
 

The play you describe Drumerman, is interference, dead ball award BR 1st all others advance if forced. Umpire feels shame.

The thread is describing another instance altogether. Not a dead ball, just an oops play on.

Just like an umpire contacted by a thrown ball, oops play on, or umpire struck by batted ball that had passed an infielder, oops play on.