ump interference
 

R2, 2 outs. B1 hits a ball into the gap. he rounds first on his way to 2nd and runs into thhe ump, after they untangle B1 continues on to 2nd where he is thrown out on a very close play. R2 is a couple of steps from home when the out is recorded at 2nd. ruling?? thanks.

The fact that B1 ran into the umpire is irrelevant. Umpires interference occurs only when the umpire interferes with the catcher while he's attempting to retire a runner, or is touched by a fair batted ball on fair territory before passing a fielder. This is just a simple timing play. The third out was recorded prior to R2 touching the plate so no run is scored.


Tim.

I'm assuming this is another NCAA test question.

On a play like this, we've got nothing. The out stands, no run scores and BU should prepare for the ensuing sh!tstorm...

Btw
 

What is the pentaly for umpire interferce anyways?

If he's hit with a batted ball over fair territory the ball is immediately dead and all runners are returned. If he interferes with the catchers attempt to retire a runner the ball is delayed dead. You wait and see if the runner is retired, and if so, you disregard the interference. If a runner isn't retired the ball is dead and runners are returned.


Tim.

When he an umpire is hit by a batted ball before it passes an infielder OTHER THAN the pitcher it is dead immediately and runners return UNLESS forced to advance by batter becoming runner due to him completing his time at bat. If an umpire is hit by a batted ball AFTER it is touched by an infielder INCLUDING the pitcher, the ball is alive and in play.You are Correct on the ruling if interfering with the catchers throw.

How does he run into the umpire here? I assume it is three man. But I still can't think of how he could run into the first base umpire.

2 outs - U3 in C goes out on a trouble ball to the gap?

U2 has head inserted, gets a late start to the infield to make the pivot and runs into BR?


Tim.

This will probably earn a 'Ridiculous' award from some of the young lads here, but on the two occasions when this happened, 7.06 was invoked by the PU. In both cases the League upheld that decision. The ruling was that 'Obstructed' does not exclude an Umpire or even a fan coming onto the field..the 'Fairness factor', you know.
If anyone here has actually called this play the way you call it in your statements here, could you please describe the runner's manager's reaction?

Well, I've never had a runner run into me or any partner of mine. If I had, I would rule that the contact is irrelevant too.

Old Timer, please cite the league you are referring to, as well as details about the situation? Umpires cannot obstruct, and they are not in the same category as fans, either.

And just why would we be concerned with the runner's manager's reaction? If he reacted inappropriately, he would probably get tossed, just as he should. The last thing on my mind in a baseball game is what the managers, players, and coaches think about anything. They usually have to be told what to think anyway.

The 'Ridiculous' award comes from this 50 year-young lad.

Sds
 

Some just come here to prove they're ignorant of rules.

You just answered one of them.

He'll not give details cuz that means it could be checked out.

WE ALL KNOW the rules of umpire interference -- only one here is left to be ignorant.

Regards,

Yes, runners return, however to complete the answer, unless forced to advance.

6.08 The batter becomes a runner and is entitled to first base without liability to be put out (provided he advances to and touches first base) when-

(d)A fair ball touches an umpire or a runner on fair territory before touching a fielder.

"Umpires can't Obstruct"? Now there is one for the books! And Umpire Interference is not the issue in this thread at all. And I believe it was Frank Umont hurrying in from the outer edge of the infield (that was the appropriate 'mechanics' in those days in the American) who tripped and fell on a runner attempting to steal second about six feet short of the bag. Frank was a huge man who didnt have a lot of mobility and the runner was stopped dead in his tracks. What would you have done?
And by the way, those definitions and interpretations which are now published in the Rules Book were not distributed or even codified then. 'Thank Gawd!
And the reason I asked about the runner's manager was I was curious to know if you survived.
I leave you now, 'cause there is no help for either of us.

And not just from the young lads, but from mature lads as well.

Both cases? That would mean that this has happend just twice in the entire history of baseball. Obviously, then, those times must stand out in your mind. Please let me know when these two instances occurred and who was involved and which league upheld a ruling contrary to the rules.
Oh, and 7.06? You mean obstruction? You mean: OBSTRUCTION is the act of a fielder who, while not in possession of the ball and not in the act of fielding the ball, impedes the progress of any runner.

Do you give manager's a survey asking them future reactions about each potential call you may need to make and then decide whether or not to follow the rules based on their reactions?

You need to change your moniker to "old time troll."

Quick Remarks
 

You nailed it. Let's see if they back away or steer another direction.:D

I'd love to hear all about this mechanic. You mean on a steal attempt, the umpire is to run in from the outfield grass line and try to beat the runner to the inside to make the call? Sounds kinda screwy to me.

First, this wouldn't have happened to me. But let's say it did:

"Time! I'm big fat Frank Umont who shouldn't be in professional baseball, God where's my spare hot dog? You, Mr. Runner are out. Where's my cigarettes??? Oh, there they are. Thank God, I thought I'd lost 'em, jeez. Anyways, as I was sayin', your out Mr. Base Runner, and I should go drop a few hundred pounds and come back when I'm not so freakin' uncoordinated. I'll see youse later."

I've had managers and coaches ream my butt up one side and down the other, and finished each and every game on the field, which these managers and coaches did not accomplish.:)

And yet, you still end up in the hospital.:D

Maybe you just aren't making enough tough calls?

Does this mean you have some information to back up the OTU's story? Let's have it.

Hey, if I get answers to my emails to MLB and WUA, I'll be happy to post them, no matter the content.

As of now, a search of Frank provides everything from his eyeglasses to ejections of Weaver and Martin and includes his written recommendations that umpires should still be able to fine players and coache and even his shoe size. One would think a ground breaking use of Obstruction to include an umpire falling on a runner would be there someplace...not so far.

Anyway, keep you posted on any answer I get from the proper authorities.

Oh, I'm out now guys. Thanks for all the kind words!

I haven't had a really good butt-chewing from a coach in a few months now, so I guess my immunity to them was a bit low.

Mr. Steve and Mr. Garth,

Please ....Until about 1965 American League umpires positioned themselves on the edge of the outfield grass a little to the right of 2nd with a runner on first. On an attempted steal you moved in toward the 2 bag shaded toward 1st but still on the outside of the base line. It was thought to be a better position than the National Laeague 'mechanic' which positioned on the inside. You can check this all out easily. Umont who was an excellent umpire in the Amer. for about 20 years was a former pro football tackle. It was easy enough to stumble as approaching the play..and that's what happened.

Mr. Garth, I said I had only seen it twice....the other one involved me in the Winter League in the islands when I got involved in a run down between 3rd and Home.

And that's why I asked if you all survived similar situations..LOL

Good Day

Who'd a thunk you'd ever see those names linked?

Reading is fundamental. I never challenged you on the mechanic. I am aware of the history of mechanics, thanks anyway.

yada yada yada...yes, that is all well known and that he and Rommell became the first umpires to wear glasses in 1956.

Even that is not the point. What I have sent requests for is the ruling made and the basis for the ruling. I doubt 7.06 would be the basis for umpire interference or even your claim of "fairness".

No, that's not what you said. You said: "on the two occasions when this happened," clearly implying that this has happened twice. And you referred to a ruling in both cases based on 7.06 being approved by THE League, (singular) clearly implying both cases occurred in the same league.

And no one has an idea of what you are implying here, but that's okay, could be an age issue.

Say hello to JThomas, a troll from both the McGriff basketball and baseball boards. Ask ol' J to recite something out of a rule book; unfortunately the poor old goof doesn't own one.

He is kinda mildly amusing though.

This is what I remember the mechanic to be from all the old video footage I've seen (I was watching baseball back then, but too young to remember umpire mechanics). What you originally said was that Umont tripped and fell on the runner, which led me to wonder why he was anywhere near the runner's base line to start with. Now that I read that he stumbled as approaching the play I can see how this could possibly happen.

My, that's odd. I'd swear the title of this thread
said it was....... :confused:

If I remember correctly
 

Reggie Jackson hit a home run while playing for the Yankees. The fans rushed the field in an attempt to mob him while he ran around the bases. He never completed his attempt to circumnavigate the bases. The league later ruled that the run did count and amended the rulebook to reflect the "fairness" principle. I doubt it was written in MLB 7.06, but it may have been written in 1976. I could be wrong about the date too. :)

And this must have been written to cover fan interference. I'm quite sure it has nothing to do with a player running into the umpire. That is called a "bad break," or as they say in golf, "a rub of the green." You just have to live with it.

Are you for real? May I suggest that you read a rule book at least 1 time before answering rules related questions? :rolleyes:

Careful Kevin, you seem to moving towards the dark side. You might find yourself named on other forums as being negative.;)

I'll bet he's man enough to post on other forums under the same moniker.


Tim.

Exactly what I've been waiting for. I've received emails regarding your insinuations. I'll be more than happy to address that issue with the proper folks. I'm sure you will be notified. (And possibly amazed that not all Seattle IPs are connected to the same computer.)

"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story, I always say."
Johnny Cash:cool: :rolleyes:

I'm insinuating nothing. PWL made it clear recently that he was posting as WhoseYourBlue on the ABUA forum. What does this have to do with you, Garth?


Tim.

Patience, Tim "I've concentrated soley on baseball in several youth organizations" Haag. Patience. I have several emails and one apology regarding some assumptions you have made. But this is not the time or place. This forum is for baseball.

Plus, I don't want to be accused of being negative at that friendly chat site. This will all be handled above board and privately.

Now please excuse me, I'm off to celebrate my birthday with my son.

Wish him a happy birthday for me.


Tim.

No, Tim. Wish Garth a happy birthday. Happy Birthday Garth!

http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/13/13_10_4.gif

You tell me, your the big liar..........
 

So coward, what would you know about being a man? Backstabbing is more your forte. I joined your little forum using my moniker and what do you know, I was banned for no reason whatsoever except for pure hatred. In essence, your post makes no sense does it now. I guess your trying to start all over on this website again.

Now your putting words in my mouth. You are sick aren't you.

Hmmm,
 

While I have a tendency to piss off everyone at times there seems to be three members that cannot share cyber space with out ridiculous name calling.

Regards,

Because it does. Now, where did I put those keys?

Thanks for the profound answer,NF. :D

Your welcome. Have you seen the keys?

Keep asking around. Surely someone will tell you that someone else has
them, only to have that person deny it. ;)

NFUmp ..........................
 

If you're not careful, the local authorities will pull your license for enabling the impaired.:D

And, keep the bouncers on for an extra hour.:D

Just a thought, is it possible for the moderator(s) to force an account to enable the ignore feature on one or more users? If so, then that, together with a stern warning to cease and desist the flamewar, should be implemented.

Careful now, Dave. Garth started this one on post # 28. Up until then it was very civil. The same thing happened to the locked thread. It was going along just fine when a certain poster went off the deep end ranting and raving and accusing without provocation.

Any issue Garth has with what Tim allegedly has done could be handled by PM, except Garth has chosen not to activate his private messaging.

Me too, me too......:eek:

I got an idea. Why don't those 3 goobers start their own web site. They could all be Super Moderators of the Whole Universe or sumthin'. Then they could flame each other to their heart's content.

Wait a minute......

They already did that.

Nevermind.....:D

If it wasn't you posting as "WhosYourBlue" on the ABUA forum who was banned from the board and is now complaining about being stabbed in the back because of it, I apologize.


Tim.

Careful what you say. You could be the next one that coward stabs in the back. He's drunk with power now. No telling how far he will go.

While I don't care to engage in these little pissing contests, I always seem to have to deal with those two more than my fair share. If everyone would see through them the way I do, this forum would be a much better place. Then they could have the ABUA website all to themselves to hold and cherish.

Is it ridiculous? Yes, but it is the only way I can convey my disdain for their cowardliness. The only problem is they deny any wrongdoing and as is their SOP will continue to do so.

Same old theme
 

Someone told me I was a terrible umpire. Someone else called me some horrible names. I don't sweat the small stuff. Now that I got that off my chest, PLAY BALL.

Don't know the answer to the first question, but several posters had their accounts suspended for a little while not too long ago. I don't notice much change in the general tone of the boards now that they are back.

(While I won't give any specifics, let me say that it's possible that additional people should be or have been suspended, and not all who were admonished have returned to the previous ways.)