Little league question
 

My nephew is playing as we speak in the little world series in bangor. They are in the fifth inning and Venuzuela has stopped the game with some sort of question about a substitution. My question is not what the rule is but the announcers on the radio are saying that the LL officials on site are calling the Little league home office in Williamsport and their are rule books being pulled out and such.

My question goes to how they are handling itself. I do football and basketball and cannot imagine pulling out rule books and calling home offices while a game is going on, Is this a baseball thing?

It's a LL World Series (and the whole LL post-season) thing.

Thanks Bob. Obviously it must be acceptable. It's just that it's something I don't think could ever happen in a basketball or football game. You have your on site refs/umps and site managers and their decision stands and that's it. It sounds like Venezuela has issued a formal protest. So they've stopped the game until it's resolved. It's something about leaving the game as a pitcher and then re-entering as a pitcher.

By the way do you think Gary is ever going to get the other board up again?

After about a 25 minute delay they ruled in favor of Tulsa.

This is pretty funny. When they resumed Venuzuela had a runner on first. Tulsa pulled a hidden ball trick and tagged the runner out at first before any pitches were thrown.

I guess that's a good way to stick it to them for the delay.

That would be pretty hard to do, although possible if there was an intervening pickoff attempt or something like that.

WHAT?

Did the umpire start play without the ball in the pitcher's hand?

And why did the runner step off at all in LL?

I think this is the Senior League World Series, and if this is the case, the umpires screwed the pooch by putting it in play without the pitcher having the ball.

The umpiring doesn't improve at the higher level, unfortunately.

This is the Senior League(15-16) World Series, not Little League Majors that is on TV.

I'm not sure of the answers to your questions. I was listening to it on the radio over the internet and may have missed a detail or two. But I'll ask them first chance I get and let you know. For al I know I may have posted it wrong. They did however pull it off somehow.

In two words, IM POSSIBLE. The ball cannot be put back into play until the pitcher has the ball in his possession and ready to pitch, the catcher is in position to receive the pitch, and the batter is in the box. If the umpires allowed a hidden ball trick, they need more schooling.

Bob

I assume the ball was dead during the 25 minute delay and to make it live the pitcher has to toe the rubber with the ball, batter in box, catcher in box, and umpire say play. If the pitcher toed the rubber without the ball it is not legally live even if the umpire said so. Hidden ball trick is impossible after a dead ball.

At Babe Ruth tournaments there is a protest committee, generally 3 people, one designee from each side and the TD or designee. If there is a protest this committee decides after hearing the issue. Decision is final.

After time has been called it is not impossible for a hidden ball play to be done before any pitches are thrown. It is very possible that the ball was made live correctly before the play.

Please elaborate, I would love to learn something new. How do you make the ball live again legally if the first baseman is hiding it in his glove?

Who said the pitcher never had the ball?

Umpire says PLAY. Pickoff to first. Ball never returned to the pitcher as pitcher pretends to tie shoe. Runner leads. Out.

Where's the pitch?

Not IM POSSIBLE.

Absolutely. Of course. But since sj was unclear of the details, several of us rushed to judgment in thinking F3 had the ball when play resumed. I guess I'll have to read an article on the game to find out what happened.

What you were observing was the LL tournament version of resolving a formal protest. The protesting manager basically has an expedited escalation process all the way through (1) the umpires on the field, (2) the tournament director, (3) the regional director, and (4) the Tournament Committee in Williamsport. As long as the protesting manager refuses to accept the decision of a lower level, he has the 100% right to escalate to the next level.

During the early part of the tournament, it can result in lots and lots of calls going to Williamsport, and sometimes delays of an hour or more before a final resolution.

This is not a hidden ball trick after a 25 minute dead ball delay. This is a hidden ball trick after a ball made live and a throwover, which if this happened was not well explained.

No need for pitch if this is what happened.

It IS impossible to have a hidden ball trick immediately after a dead ball. A hidden ball trick after a legal throwover is not immediately after a dead ball.

Well up until now everyone was talking about a hidden ball play before a pitch was thrown, not immediately after a dead ball.

If you read the original post, it clearly says "before a pitch is thrown."

Reading is fundamental.

Ok. I found out how it happened. Venezuala lost the appeal after hearing from the home office. The whole thing caused about a thirty minute delay in the game. It was planned in the dugout during the delay the coaches thinking that they might be asleep when the game started again. When play resumed Venuzuela had a runner on first. The pitcher had the ball and the ump said to play. The pitcher put his foot on the rubber and then ended up throwing to first to keep the runner close. The first baseman walked toward the pitcher with the ball and the pitcher walked toward the first baseman. He pretended to hand him the ball but obviously the first baseman kept it and went back to first. The runner and the first base coach were asleep and when the runner led off he got him. So no pitch was thrown.

The way the original post was worded, the ball was put in play (illegally) with F3 holding the ball. No one said there had to be a pitch. If all elements are present, and the PU says, "Play ball", the ball becomes live. If F1 is on the mound when he ties his shoe, "BALK".

Bob

Here is the original post: "When they resumed Venuzuela had a runner on first. Tulsa pulled a hidden ball trick and tagged the runner out at first before any pitches were thrown."

So by reading that you decided that the pitcher did not have the ball when the umpire said play...that is a pretty big assumption.

SJ said "Tulsa pulled a hidden ball trick and tagged the runner out at first before any pitches were thrown." You replied " In two words, IM POSSIBLE"

So if you say that it is "IM POSSIBLE" before any pitches were thrown, then that is the same as saying that has to be a pitch.

This wasn't an NCAA game. Get the rules straight.

Yes, unless he's tying his shoes on or astride the rubber, he's okay in OBR and JR/SR league.

SJ, in original post said play was stopped to discuss the subject. I assume time was called. Shortly after that SJ said after a 25 minute delay a ruling was made. I assume time was still in effect. So before a pitch was thrown the ball was dead.

Reading is fundamental. Try to read more than one post to get more information.

Play was stopped to discuss a substitution issue.

Then, "When they resumed Venuzuela had a runner on first. Tulsa pulled a hidden ball trick and tagged the runner out at first before any pitches were thrown."

Nothing said about the ball being dead for the hidden ball, is there?

And you'll notice, sj has followed up with another post. I was right.

Here was the problem and why the rule books were out. The Venezuelan manager had a Spanish rule book. The rule book (English) came out so that the tournament director could read the rule. Unhappy that the tournament directors ruling (the pitcher can return to the mound after being pinch hit for) he requested a phone call be placed to Williamsport and it was. Williamsport said the same thing as the tournament director only in Spanish.

It seems that in the regional tournament Venezuela lost a game 2-0 after they pinch hit for the pitcher and was told he could not return to the mound.

If I was in the same situation I’d most likely do the same.

There was a throw over prior to the hidden ball trick. The first basemen walked over to the pitcher as if to say a word or two to the pitcher the first basemen simply placed his glove inside the pitchers and walked back to first base. The pitcher never stepped on the dirt of the mound. The runner was tagged by the first basemen that still had the ball.

The umpires and tournament director did everything correctly in both situations.

There's a way around this, and I have used it.

Mgr. "We want to protest."

Me, "Please specify."

[Substiute your own here]: "That's an illegal pitch."

"No it isn't. This is a judgment call, ergo, no protest will be heard. Play on, MacDuff."

"But the rule book says ..."

"No protest shall be considered on a decision involving an umpire's judgment."

"I'm not happy with that."

"And I'm not happy that this taking so long. Find a seat and resume coahing."

Since the protest is not considered in the first place, there's no need to go through the LL food chain and hold up the game. We have used this standard in our area, and it has cut protests by about 80%.

IMHO, too many LL umps (and admins) panic when they hear the p-word and get on the phone right away.

It gets silly. In a state game (which I did not work or witness), a protest went to Bristol. It was over a--don't gag now--batter who swung and missed at a pitch that hit him. PU didn't know what to do. Neither did his pards. Brain-addled site director had to get on the phone.

I have only (personally) seen two valid protests. One was over an illgeal pitcher (and was upheld). The other was over a misinterpretation of a rule (by me; I kicked it). I lucked out. Back in those days, there was not "protest must be heard before game continues" rule. The protesting team won the game, so there was no need to progress further.

Ace

It may be effective in cutting down on frivolous protests, but it is not within the umpires' domain to make that call. You cannot be the judge when the rule is set up for you to be the defendant, regardless of your innocence.

Whether or not the issue being protested is a judgment or a rule interpretation is, itself, sometimes open to debate, and therefore the consistent instruction, from Little League all the way through professional baseball, is to accept the protest and follow the protest rules, even if you, the umpire, think it is a frivolous or "illegal" protest.

I don't totally agree with that - it has to be a protestable situation. If it's a judgement call, it is NOT a protestable situation - period. Illegal pitcher, not meeting MPR are protestable situations . . .

Balk.

That wasn't a balk.

Yes it was.

I protest.

You can't protest, it's a judgment call.

I think you called it because you don't understand the balk rule.

I called it because the pitcher went to his mouth on the mound. That's a balk.

See, I told you - no it isn't. The rule says the penalty for that infraction is a ball.

No it doesn't - and don't you even think of whipping that rulebook out on me, boy.

OK, but I protest.

You can't protest, it's a judgment call.

As a follow up in support of my claim that accepting a protest even if it's over a judgment decision is what we should do, following is Evans on the subject:

Professional Interpretation: At times, a manager may insist on lodging a protest on a decision which is, in essence, a judgment call. After explaining the prohibition against protesting judgment calls, the umpire should go ahead and accept the protest in order to proceed with the game in a timely manner. It will then be the league president's responsibility to nullify the improperly lodged protest.

Little League officials encourage the same practice - in order to expedite the resolution of the protest, don't try to shut it down even if you're sure it's frivolous. Just pass it on, and it will (hopefully) be rejected as it should be, by following due process.

I agree with this 100%. But, at what point of the protest 'chain' does the improperly lodged protest end?
I mean, in LL tournament play, the protest must be decided on before the game continues, right? So, what if the manager doesn't agree with the decision of the TD? Then he disagrees with the dirtrict, then state, then regional, and now he's reached LL Int'l. This seems like an awefully lot of wasted time on a non-protestable call.

I hope this doesn't sound retarded. As I formulate this in my mind, it doesn't. Does that mean that a coach can protest a game because an umpire is calling strikes out of the strike zone? He's not arguing balls & strikes, he's "protesting". The umpire is misinterpreting the rule of what the zone is supposed to be. I know it's far-fetched, but are you going to allow that protest?

Yes, it is a waste of time, and yes, even the protest that the umpire is misinterpreting the strikezone SHOULD be run up the protest flagpole, after using best efforts to persuade the coach that he's erroneously protesting a judgment call.

During regular season, I personally endorse the use of a protest fee to discourage the filing of frivolous protests. I don't even mind serving on the protest committee, if the coach is going to pay for the pizza and beer.

During tournament, the expectation is that the coaches will be more competent and informed than your average coach, and would not be so obstinate as to keep protesting all the way to Williamsport when the umpire, the tournament director, and the regional committee have all told him he's a doofus.

But, the rule is the rule. If the coach disagrees with you that he is protesting something that is not protestable, you as the umpire cannot refuse to accept the protest. You must do as the rule says and follow the due process.

Play was stopped for 25 minutes. Are you telling me the ball was not dead during this time? In a game you work would you allow a hidden ball trick after a 25 minute delay of any kind?

Are you illiterate?

The hidden ball play came after the ball was put in play and a subsequent pickoff attempt at first base.

The ball can not be put in play until the pitcher toes the rubber with it after a dead ball, and I believe the ball should be dead while they discussed anything for 25 minutes.

Read the 1st post - "play was stopped", then read the 4th post "after a 25 minute delay". You would consider the ball live during this play stoppage and allow a hidden ball trick to succeed without putting the ball in play legallly? Answer the question.

Read this carefully, I will spell it out for you.

After the stoppage F1 is on the rubber with the ball. PU puts the ball in play. F1 attempts a pick-off to first. F3 walks the ball back towards F1 and pretends to give it to him, then returns to his position with the ball. F1 pretends to tie his shoe. R1 wanders off the base and is tagged by F3.

It's not that hard to understand!

Yes, I went back and re-read all the posts. The pickoff was introduced in post #21 well after the 1st and 4th posts that did not mention a pickoff. Now, what I what I don't understand is why a pickoff in LL baseball where you can't leave the base until the pitch reaches the batter.

Because this was a World Series game being played somewhere other than Williamsport, which means it was Jr, Sr, or Big League where leadoffs are allowed...:rolleyes:

You apparently missed that this was not at Williamsport.

In fact, the original post mentioned it was in Bangor (Maine) which everyone knows is where they have the SENIOR Little League World Series. :)

Yes, I missed this was not in Williamsport. I thought it was a regional game. There is very little little league in these parts so I would not know anything about Bangor Maine. Anyway, it makes more sense now that it was not in Williamsport.

I was kidding with the "everyone knows" comment. I wouldn't expect many to know just from a passing reference to "bangor" that it was an upper division of Little League that was being discussed.

The only way I knew it was...as soon as he posted the location originally, I Dogpile searched Little League World Series, Bangor, ME. Found out there was a Senior Series there. Otherwise...no clue!

Also making it confusing was that there was a Venezuela team in both tournaments, so naturally we first thought of Williamsport.

Don't feel all alone, DG.