The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Baseball (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/)
-   -   Nfhs Fpsr @ Hp (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/26253-nfhs-fpsr-hp.html)

Tim C Wed Apr 26, 2006 04:01pm

Nfhs Fpsr @ Hp
 
Situation:

Base loaded and less than two out.

Ground ball to F4 who throws home to F2 covering the plate.

Throw pulls F2 towards the left handed hitting batter's box.

Advancing R3 is clearly out on the force at the plate.

As R3 slides into the plate his slide takes him slightly past the plate where he upends the catcher who then throws wildly to first in an attempt to retire the batter-runner.

You make the call,

Regards,

SanDiegoSteve Wed Apr 26, 2006 04:24pm

"Time, Interference, Illegal Slide, Batter-Runner Out."

According to 2-32-2c, it is an illegal slide if a runner goes beyond the base and then makes contact with or alters the play of the fielder. If the runner decides to slide, it must be a legal slide, and he may slide or run in a direction away from the fielder to avoid making contact.

mcrowder Wed Apr 26, 2006 04:25pm

No call for me. Sounds to me like he was not fully beyond home when contact occurred. SDS's rule is not meant to apply unless the runner passes the base. If he's still ON the base, and his feet (which are beyond the base) contact a fielder, play on.

SanDiegoSteve Wed Apr 26, 2006 04:31pm

Sounded to me like he said R3 was "slightly past home plate," which I took to mean his entire body was past the plate, and F2 was in the left hand batter's box making the throw. He upended the catcher, so he must have been considerably past the plate, IMO.

bossman72 Wed Apr 26, 2006 05:25pm

I agree with steve.

Bang the DP

UmpJM Wed Apr 26, 2006 05:45pm

While there is no way to definitively comment without having seen the play, as described (and the picture I have in my mind from that description), I would be inclined to agree with mcrowder's assessment that this is "nothing", play on.

A bases loaded force at home on a grounder to the 2nd basemen is typically a "close play". The left-hand batter's box begins six inches from home plate. It is well within the realm of likelihood that the R3 made a perfectly legal slide into home and "upended" the catcher with his butt resting on home plate.

It's also entirely possible that the R3 went out of his way to (intentionally) interfere with the F2's chance to complete a double play on the BR. Can't tell from the description.

JM

Rich Wed Apr 26, 2006 06:09pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoachJM
While there is no way to definitively comment without having seen the play, as described (and the picture I have in my mind from that description), I would be inclined to agree with mcrowder's assessment that this is "nothing", play on.

A bases loaded force at home on a grounder to the 2nd basemen is typically a "close play". The left-hand batter's box begins six inches from home plate. It is well within the realm of likelihood that the R3 made a perfectly legal slide into home and "upended" the catcher with his butt resting on home plate.


It's also entirely possible that the R3 went out of his way to (intentionally) interfere with the F2's chance to complete a double play on the BR. Can't tell from the description.

JM

It doesn't matter -- is initial contact behind the base (plate)? If so, FPSR.

Dave Hensley Wed Apr 26, 2006 06:59pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser
It doesn't matter -- is initial contact behind the base (plate)? If so, FPSR.

Thank you. I was beginning to wonder if I was absent the day they introduced this "the entire body has to be beyond the base and then make contact" in order to call the FPSR violation.

bossman72 Wed Apr 26, 2006 07:16pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Hensley
Thank you. I was beginning to wonder if I was absent the day they introduced this "the entire body has to be beyond the base and then make contact" in order to call the FPSR violation.


Hahaha, i was thinking the same thing, Dave

mbyron Wed Apr 26, 2006 08:02pm

I agree with Steve, Rich, Dave: it's not required that the entire player be beyond HP: if contact is made past the plate, it's a FPSR violation.

David B Wed Apr 26, 2006 08:28pm

Good point!
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser
It doesn't matter -- is initial contact behind the base (plate)? If so, FPSR.


I agree this has to be a FPSR. I believe this play was actually in an interpretation one of the last few years, I'll have to look it up and see, but
since he interfered with the play, its an out.

Thanks
David

Rich Wed Apr 26, 2006 09:05pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbyron
I agree with Steve, Rich, Dave: it's not required that the entire player be beyond HP: if contact is made past the plate, it's a FPSR violation.

INITIAL contact. If contact is made before or on the plate and continues through the plate, it's nothing.

SAump Wed Apr 26, 2006 09:09pm

SAfe
 
The runner fulfilled his obligation by sliding. At 2B, the bag absorbs the sliding runners energy, and it is very difficult to actually over-slide the base. Its a different story at the plate. Very few players stop at the plate.

I may rule OUT if I see the runner change his angle trying to take the catcher OUT. But not if he's hustling to SCORE and the play was that close at the plate. I am not going to penalize the runner. Looks like the throw from F4 is what prevented the DP, not the runner. I have nothing, play on.

LMan Wed Apr 26, 2006 10:22pm

I'm taking the second out, only because its FEDlandia.

LakeErieUmp Wed Apr 26, 2006 11:08pm

I'm with SAump. At second or third there is a four plus inch high bag catching the back leg on a slide. Effort is required to overslide the base and thus interference. But at home there is nothing to slow the runner. The only way for a runner - ENTITLED to make an effort to achieve his base - can stop on a dime is to break his leg. NOT the intent of the interference rule.
The catcher should lift at receiving the throw on the plate.
IMHO ticky-tacky calling interference unless PU sees intent.

DG Wed Apr 26, 2006 11:53pm

He slides "slightly" past the plate and upends the catcher? FPSR, two outs, no run scored. See Case book 2.32.2 Situation C. I hope it never happens to me because I don't like it, but it is what it is.

BigUmp56 Wed Apr 26, 2006 11:58pm

Good pick up, DG. This is the way FED want's us to call it

2.32.2 SITUATION C:

On a force play slide at the plate, the runner slides over (beyond the plate) and makes contact with F2. Is the runner guilty of violating the force play slide rule?

Ruling:

Yes. A runner is expected to stop short of the back edge of home plate, the same as he would at other bases. Had the runner not made contact or altered the play, there would have been no violation. 2-32-1c(f).



Tim.

LakeErieUmp Thu Apr 27, 2006 12:11am

Damn Fed rulebook!
We all know the runner's giving up two steps to stop short of the back edge of the plate. But right is right, and I was wrong.
Although catcher better not have his foot on the white until he has the ball in his hand - if I have to call interference on the runner for not stopping on a dime and giving a nickel change then the DEFENSIVE impeding progress without the ball should be called too.

LDUB Thu Apr 27, 2006 12:11am

Quote:

Originally Posted by LMan
I'm taking the second out, only because its FEDlandia.

So you wouldn't call the out in a NCAA game?

SAump Thu Apr 27, 2006 12:23am

Fine Print
 
A runner may OVER SLIDE home, not the same as the "other bases," but what more can I expect from people that can't comprehend the difference.

Div II Colleges, R2 and R1 move with a ball hit into the deep RF gap. I saw both baserunners score "simultaneously," one right after the other. The first runner slid over the plate and stood up and screened the catcher (no contact) while the second runner slid in safely behind the first. Would have been a very close play at the plate on the second runner without the SHIELD. Yet, physically impossible if the first runner is expected to stop before the back edge of the plate.

DO Over.

SanDiegoSteve Thu Apr 27, 2006 12:24am

This is what happens when you change a perfectly good (OBR) rule, which makes no reference as to what is a slide, legal or otherwise, to make up candy-a$$ rules (FED) just to make the game "safer" for little Johnny.

I know, if I don't like FED rules, blah, blah, blah........
http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/18/18_7_13v.gif

SAump Thu Apr 27, 2006 12:32am

All bases are not equal
 
First base isn't the same as the other bases, neither is HOME.

SanDiegoSteve Thu Apr 27, 2006 12:35am

Quote:

Originally Posted by SAump
First base isn't the same as the other bases, neither is HOME.

Unfortunately, the FED definitions of legal and illegal slide make no reference to which bases, so they apply equally to all bases. Perhaps we could have the FED hire you to change the rule, Oui?

LDUB Thu Apr 27, 2006 12:49am

Quote:

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve
This is what happens when you change a perfectly good (OBR) rule, which makes no reference as to what is a slide, legal or otherwise, to make up candy-a$$ rules (FED) just to make the game "safer" for little Johnny.

I know, if I don't like FED rules, blah, blah, blah........
http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/18/18_7_13v.gif

I am wondering why you have made several posts about how stupid the NFHS is for having a FPSR while the NCAA has the exact same rule and you have made no mention about how the NCAA is ruining baseball. It seems as if you really don't hate the FPSR. You just like going on about how much you hate the NF, for if you really did not like the FPSR you would have made some sort of comment about the NCAA.

SanDiegoSteve Thu Apr 27, 2006 12:53am

I am sure that if I had pursued a life of NCAA baseball that I would be railing against that absolutely insane rule book of theirs also, but I spent 19 seasons working high school ball, so that is where I focus my tirades. For the record, the FPSR bites at any level, IMWOBWHO.

bossman72 Thu Apr 27, 2006 12:54am

Quote:

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve
This is what happens when you change a perfectly good (OBR) rule, which makes no reference as to what is a slide, legal or otherwise, to make up candy-a$$ rules (FED) just to make the game "safer" for little Johnny.

See, you're thinking of the slight violation of the rule- you have to think of a more extreme violation. Like if a runner comes barreling into a base, makes a legal slide, but doesn't start his slide until he's a couple feet away from the base and totally chops the pivot man's legs out from underneith him. That's why they made the rule the way it is (i'd imagine).

SanDiegoSteve Thu Apr 27, 2006 01:06am

Then that pivot man should have made a better play. I'm sorry, I played hard-nosed, blood and guts baseball growing up. We didn't have slide rules, or sliding pads, or elbow pads, or batting gloves or nothing! We played good old country hardball. I know we live in lawsuit-happy times, but sometimes in trying to do the right thing, rule makers go overboard the other way, and we end up with a sport that only slightly resembles baseball.

SAump Thu Apr 27, 2006 01:10am

Marbles w/ no outs
 
Worse, runners return to the bases occupied at the TOP, as well.

Rats would coach the catcher to wait behind the plate.

BigUmp56 Thu Apr 27, 2006 02:23am

Quote:

Originally Posted by SAump
A runner may OVER SLIDE home, not the same as the "other bases," but what more can I expect from people that can't comprehend the difference.

Div II Colleges, R2 and R1 move with a ball hit into the deep RF gap. I saw both baserunners score "simultaneously," one right after the other. The first runner slid over the plate and stood up and screened the catcher (no contact) while the second runner slid in safely behind the first. Would have been a very close play at the plate on the second runner without the SHIELD. Yet, physically impossible if the first runner is expected to stop before the back edge of the plate.

DO Over.

Unless you saw one heck of a poor catcher or an errant throw there's no way he should have been screened by the first runner. With the ball in right center he would have been set up on the first base side of the plate just in fair territory to receive the throw. The first runner would have easily slid in behind the catcher and stood up well behind him.


Tim.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:00am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1