baseline

[Don Mueller]

Originally Posted by 3appleshigh

No BS, man, baseball has ways to take care of themselves. And in adult ball, if a guy runs obviously out of the lane to gain an advantage, HE WILL GET PLUNKED.

Also, note, I have said they need to be taught that the Loob over into the field (a last resort) is not the last resort that should be taught. They need to be taught first to find a lane, the Firstbaseman need to be taught to help the catcher early with an INSIDE or OUTSIDE call, but the last resort isn't a trick shot, that could end up with the runner at second. The last resort is to make a good solid throw to where you would normally find the firstbaseman, and THAT is through the runners back.

Until it becomes a call for simply causing a bad throw, This is the BEST PLAY for the defense to make, when nothing else is easily available.

I love how DG has resorted to namecalling, the last hope for the uneducated.

There is never a last resort that calls for throwing at the runners back.
If F3 is on the inside and marginally stretched his glove is 4' to the inside. If BR has his right foot on the foul line so his entire body is inside the line he's taking at most 30". F2 still has an 18" window to throw to without aiming at the back. That's before he makes a quick slidestep to the inside and creates a great angle. The reality is if BR is that far inside, F3 would simply step to the outside and now F2 has about a 4' window to throw at without coming close to BR. There are times (few as they are) that BR obstructs, but there is never an appropriate time for F2 to aim at BR back.

Originally Posted by 3appleshigh

This is the BEST PLAY for the defense to make, when nothing else is easily available.

OK guys, when the going gets tough, lets hurt em.

[3appleshigh]

If there was never a time that this would happen, There would not be a rule prohibiting the runner from doing what he is doing.

[3appleshigh]

"The last resort is to make a good solid throw to where you would normally find the firstbaseman, and THAT is through the runners back. "

Where is this AIMING AT THE RUNNERS BACK.

[LMan]

Originally Posted by 3appleshigh

"The last resort is to make a good solid throw to where you would normally find the firstbaseman, and THAT is through the runners back. "

Where is this AIMING AT THE RUNNERS BACK.

Interesting point of view for a player. Reprehensible for an umpire.

[Don Mueller]

Originally Posted by 3appleshigh

If there was never a time that this would happen, There would not be a rule prohibiting the runner from doing what he is doing.

I didn't say there was never obstruction.
I said there was never a reason to throw AT a runners back.
There's a difference between a ball hitting a runner and a fielder throwing at the runner.
Just like there's a difference between incidental contact and malicious contact.

If you feel compelled to throw balls at people then go play kickball or dodgeball

[3appleshigh]

Once again, And I'll Type Slow for you

If the catcher simply cannot, or more likely doesn't have the TIME, to step out and around the runner, instead of lobing the ball into the out field, The CATCHER SHOULD THROW A NORMAL THROW to the FIRSTBASEMAN, in Some cases this will end up being THROUGH the base runner.

He should not Throw At the Runner, but AT FIRSTBASE. The runner just happens to be in the way because he is breaking the rules.

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by 3appleshigh

Once again, And I'll Type Slow for you

He sould not Throw At the Runner, but AT FIRSTBASE. The runner just happens to be in the way because he is breaking the rules.

This seems much more reasonable than this:

Originally Posted by 3appleshigh

NO

If the catcher can't make the throw, he should have been taught to hit the runner in the back for the interference call.

Tim.

[DG]

Originally Posted by 3appleshigh

If the catcher simply cannot, or more likely doesn't have the TIME, to step out and around the runner, instead of loobing the ball into the out field, The CATCHER SHOULD THROW A NORMAL THROW to the FIRSTBASEMAN, in Some cases this will end up being THROUGH the base runner.

He sould not Throw At the Runner, but AT FIRSTBASE. The runner just happens to be in the way because he is breaking the rules.

You ARE changing your position on this subject. In post #4 you said "If the catcher can't make the throw, he should have been taught to hit the runner in the back for the interference call." and later defended this position even after several of us disagreed with this "coaching" style.

Maybe there is hope for you.

[3appleshigh]

Yes in post four I over simplified, I have gone on to repeatedly say throw to the bag through the runner.

I'm sorry you took it that he should go out of his way to hit a runner.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by 3appleshigh

I'm sorry you took it that he should go out of his way to hit a runner.

Not to belabor the point. but how else would anyone take: "If the catcher can't make the throw, he should have been taught to hit the runner in the back for the interference call."


I don't see how you can lay blame for a "misunderstanding" at the feet of the reader.

[DG]

Originally Posted by 3appleshigh

Yes in post four I over simplified, I have gone on to repeatedly say throw to the bag through the runner.

You did not oversimplify, you stated a coaching strategy. Then, you repeatedly said throw the ball to the runner's back and defended this strategy. Go back and read your posts. In #34, for example, you said in upper big boy ball this is a "strategy to be instructed".

You will never be cured until you admit you have a problem. No catcher, at any level, should be coached to throw at a runner. Take a step, find a lane, and throw the ball to F3.

[3appleshigh]

I simply said I over simplified, that places the blame on me for the misunderstanding, I then knew what I meant by what I was saying, and by not spelling it out (oversimplifying) I lead the reader to TAKE IT a specific way. I have now apopolgised for that and you both found the desire to come on and belittle me, I hope you felt much better having done that.

I personally did not see how throwing to the base through the runner, and throwing at the runner were all that different, hence my poor usage of language. Nor did I think anyone would assume that I meant do not try anything else first. These are MY mistakes. However, even when I spelt things out more clearly you decided not to read what I was writing anymore and simply get emotionally attached. That was YOUR mistake.

It takes Two to tango, I have most definatly taken responsibility for my portion. I have learned from my mistake, and will hopefully not make a similar one in the future. That is how I try to Grow as a human. I hope you can do this in the future too, That would make the world a better place.

Godspeed.