The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Sat Aug 11, 2007, 11:16am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Posts: 3,100
No interference was called on this play (and nobody argued).
__________________
greymule
More whiskey—and fresh horses for my men!
Roll Tide!
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Sat Aug 11, 2007, 11:57am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 13
The play the original poster asked about ended the top of the seventh in Thursday's Seattle v. Baltimore game. Here's a URL for the video of that half inning. The play ends the inning, and begins at about 5:05 into it.

http://tinyurl.com/3d4vc7

The announcer actually gives a pretty good explanation of running lane interference.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Sat Aug 11, 2007, 12:39pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 469
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve
I agree. It looks like a really bad throw. The runner did not cause the pitcher to throw wildly. It looks like the umpire is about to get plastered though.

Hey Darien, back under the bus again.
Yeah, apparently I'm reading a mirror image of the rule book. I've never noticed that there is a distorted view from under here. Things get reversed when you go to the under side of the bus.
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Sat Aug 11, 2007, 12:50pm
In Time Out
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by greymule
No interference was called on this play (and nobody argued).
The quality of the throw was so poor was the reason the interference wasn't called would be my guess judging from the sequences.
__________________
I have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Sat Aug 11, 2007, 01:04pm
In Time Out
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by ManInBlue
I just love your candor, Steven. Not everything I wrote was wrong - A foot on the line IS considered in the lane. Please be more accurate with your comments.

You both are correct. I am wrong. Don't have a Hank's idea in hell where I came up with that. Serious brain fart on my part. Sorry about that.
You're still wrong. Both feet have to be inside the running lane. Neither foot can be touching outside the lines. It wouldn't be a running lane if you are allowed to run outside of it even with a foot touching outside the lane.

Do you drive straddling the middle lane on the highway? How's that for candor?
__________________
I have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Sat Aug 11, 2007, 01:10pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Houghton, U.P., Michigan
Posts: 9,953
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Ricketts
The play the original poster asked about ended the top of the seventh in Thursday's Seattle v. Baltimore game. Here's a URL for the video of that half inning. The play ends the inning, and begins at about 5:05 into it.

http://tinyurl.com/3d4vc7

The announcer actually gives a pretty good explanation of running lane interference.
Nice. Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Sat Aug 11, 2007, 01:44pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: South Bend, In.
Posts: 2,192
Send a message via AIM to BigUmp56 Send a message via Yahoo to BigUmp56
Quote:
Originally Posted by ManInBlue
Not everything I wrote was wrong - A foot on the line IS considered in the lane.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Tyler
You're still wrong. Both feet have to be inside the running lane. Neither foot can be touching outside the lines. It wouldn't be a running lane if you are allowed to run outside of it even with a [i]foot touching outside the lane.
How is what he said still wrong? I didn't read him saying running with one foot outside (to the left of) the foul line is not a violation.


Official Notes - Case Book - Comments: The lines marking the three foot lane are a part of that “lane” but the interpretation to be made is that a runner is required to have both feet within the three foot “lane” or on the lines marking the “lane.”



Tim.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old Sat Aug 11, 2007, 01:47pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 555
Seemed like a good call there. F3 in my judgment appeared to short arm the catch because he saw Ichiro running at him (in fair territory). Even after short arming the catch, he still got run into by Ichiro. Good call.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Ricketts
The play the original poster asked about ended the top of the seventh in Thursday's Seattle v. Baltimore game. Here's a URL for the video of that half inning. The play ends the inning, and begins at about 5:05 into it.

http://tinyurl.com/3d4vc7

The announcer actually gives a pretty good explanation of running lane interference.
__________________
Well I am certainly wiser than this man. It is only too likely that neither of us has any knowledge to boast of; but he thinks that he knows something which he does not know, whereas I am quite conscious of my ignorance. At any rate it seems that I am wiser than he is to this small extent, that I do not think that I know what I do not know. ~Socrates
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old Sat Aug 11, 2007, 07:04pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,466
Send a message via AIM to rainmaker
I know from the basketball board, that sometimes these threads go off on tangents, so I'm going to just re-iterate what I think is the answer to the original question, and see if I understand the sitch correctly.

The call was interference on Ichiro for either running outside the area where he's allowed to run, or for running into the first baseman, and thus the "non-catch" was because of the interference and Ichiro was out.

I'm not sure if I know whether the so called rule about running within a certain area is correct as quoted, or whether it applies in the OP.

Thanks for the answers.
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Sat Aug 11, 2007, 07:10pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 469
Quote:
Originally Posted by rainmaker
I know from the basketball board, that sometimes these threads go off on tangents, so I'm going to just re-iterate what I think is the answer to the original question, and see if I understand the sitch correctly.

The call was interference on Ichiro for either running outside the area where he's allowed to run, or for running into the first baseman, and thus the "non-catch" was because of the interference and Ichiro was out.

I'm not sure if I know whether the so called rule about running within a certain area is correct as quoted, or whether it applies in the OP.

Thanks for the answers.
From what I saw, Ichiro was out of the running lane. That is the three foot lane drawn from 45' to 1B. The batter-runner must have BOTH ( )feet in that lane. He didn't, so he's out for interference. Running into F3, although this too could be INT, I think the call was based on the running lane violation not for the contact with F3.
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Mon Aug 13, 2007, 06:32pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 226
talking about the N-HOOD call any one see the braves-philles game lasst night where ole Bobby did NOT get the N-HOOD call at second? WOW
__________________
It's sad when you're at a baseball game and realize that you'll never have the money, status or talent that the guys on the field take for granted. And it gets even worse when the grounds crew gives way to the players.
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old Mon Aug 13, 2007, 08:44pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 822
That was a great call by the 2nd base umpire. I don't care about either team. so there!
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old Mon Aug 13, 2007, 08:52pm
DG DG is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,022
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Ricketts
On the play in question, Ichiro hit a chopper that was fielded by the pitcher, if I recall correctly. As he ran to first base, at least one foot was landing in fair territory, so he was outside the running lane. The pitcher's throw was wide right, and sailed past the first baseman.

"But, why, why, why, on the play we saw, was Ichiro called out when his running outside the lane didn't have anything to do with the pitcher making a bad throw -- and that was why the first baseman couldn't catch it?"
A quality throw is required to rule interference on this play, but as always, it is umpires judgement.
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old Mon Aug 13, 2007, 09:29pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 4,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Ricketts

However, when you explain the rule to your 9 year old son, be sure to leave this part out. Otherwise, he might then ask, "But, why, why, why, on the play we saw, was Ichiro called out when his running outside the lane didn't have anything to do with the pitcher making a bad throw -- and that was why the first baseman couldn't catch it?" If he does ask that question, you'll have to look to someone else for an answer, because I don't have one.
The answer is simple and obvious. "The umpire working the game judged that Ichiro's actions interfered with the fielder's opportunity to make the play, regardless of what we might think from watching televsion."
__________________
GB
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 14, 2007, 06:26am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Glen Burnie, Md
Posts: 371
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Ricketts
The play the original poster asked about ended the top of the seventh in Thursday's Seattle v. Baltimore game. Here's a URL for the video of that half inning. The play ends the inning, and begins at about 5:05 into it.

http://tinyurl.com/3d4vc7

The announcer actually gives a pretty good explanation of running lane interference.
That was the first rule that Jim Palmer ever got even close to right. I have heard him say numerous times that the tie goes to the runner. Makes me want to SCREAM!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mariners-Angels DTS kicked by BR whitecane Baseball 19 Fri Aug 03, 2007 11:23pm
Boston-Seattle play PS2Man Baseball 12 Thu Aug 31, 2006 05:33pm
Swipe Tag @ 1st in the Mariners/BoSox game shickenbottom Baseball 2 Mon Apr 17, 2006 12:12pm
Base on Balls Trick Play Coach1249 Baseball 7 Thu Jun 03, 2004 03:24pm
ASA Double base play -- I hope I'm not off-base here Tap Softball 9 Wed Mar 05, 2003 11:15pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:13am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1