Why not?

MTD, Sr.

Bad joojoo has been following the Indians for some years now. :D

MTD, Sr.

[QUOTE=RichMSN]I wouldn'd call it short. Drew Coble - AL - 1983 to 1999. 16 years isn't bad, and 1999 was the strike year. So alot of umpires ended their careers that year.

Bob:

I respect you posts quite a bit. So I a little suprised by your response. After reading further posts would you change your mind?

MTD, Sr.

No.

Then besides your eloquent one word responses, can you explain how you have an out on a play where it appears (from whats said in the post) that R2 is in control of his body, standing on the bag, has "control" of the base, and the throw takes F6 into the runner..

..."after catching the ball is off balance and leans on the runner"
and
..."the runner falls to the ground with the shortstop and comes off the base"

Why do you give the benefit of the doubt on this to the defense when it was the defense that was the impetus for the runner coming off the base.
So your saying the infielders can pretty much have carte blanche in making contact with the runner? In trying to make a play?

I too, like the other poster have always viewed your thoughts with respect...just seem a little surprising youd have an out on this.

I can't asnwer for Bob, but for me, you make this sound like a play that took a long time to develop, whereas I see it as bang bang, as most pick 0ff plays are. Most likely the runner reached the bag and the field was receiving the ball...no way to confirm that the runner was stable and in control of himself. If indeed it was bang, bang...I have an out.

I see what your saying, but the post seems to indicate otherwise.

"Runner gets back to 2nd base standing up"..Back to 2nd says "stable to me


Then the fun starts..."shortstop coming in behind second base has to reach around the runner standing on second to catch the throw"..sounds like contact has started..

..."The shortstop, after catching the ball is off balance and leans on the runner, the runner falls to the ground with the shortstop and comes off the base. The shortstop applies the tag from the catch to the ground..."

Shortstop is OFF BALANCE? LEANS on the runner? After runner was BACK to 2nd, STANDING on the base. Seems like the throw took F6 into the bag and caused the actions described.


I dont think Bang Bang should be determining factor. Its what caused runner to come off base. If runner in reaching for the base, wasnt in control or "stable" as you say, and a "normal" tag was applied, Id lean towards an out.
But with the SS being off balance, the throw taking SS into the runner,thats what knocked R2 off the base. Why should the defense benefit whey they caused the action??

Ridiculously oversimplified answer to a very complex question.

So, Bob...what you are saying is basically that it doesn't matter to you if the runner is firmly planted on the base, it's okay for the fielder to physically remove him from the base to tag him? Why don't we just give the fielder a gun and have him steal the runner's wallet and gold links while we're at it then?

He's not saying that -- his answer was only one word, after all.

If he's firmly on the base a "lean" isn't going to take R2 down, is it?

It seems to me that it is a very simple determination:

Runner's impetus takes him off the base in any manner, OUT.

Runner's impetus is not carrying him off base and then without supplying any of the actual momentum himself, is pushed off the base by the fielder, SAFE.

It would depend on how big and strong the fielder is, or how small and frail the runner is. A big person can squash a little person with just a little force. How hard was the "lean." I lean on counter tops all the time, and they don't fall to the ground (normally.):)

Well, it's why you can't tell the answer to the question without seeing the play. I've called time for a fielder pushing through a runner this year and also called a runner out for going in standing up, easliy coming off from a normal tag, and being tagged out.

I wasn't there, but I disagree with you assessment.

To me it says he didnt' slide.


Again, as demonstrated by your use of "then", you are assuming that this all took some time to happen. In my experience pick-off attempts happen quickly. with most action occurring near simulataneously; not runner gets back... pitcher throws...fielder gloves ball.

A lean caused a stable runner to fall....I don't think so. Throw caused the lean? Who cares?

Rich, come on, from reading your opinions on these kinds of things, youve always seemed like someone who knows the proper calls on plays like these..

You say a "lean". I guess one can read it different, but when the post says..

.."the runner gets back to second base standing up"... "back" means hes in "control" of the base, and his body movements, hes not leaning, or barely hanging onto the base by a fingertip.

and..

...."has to reach around the runner standing on second to catch the throw"

Its says the shortstop is the one whos off-balance. And so the dominoes fall. The shortstop is reaching around the runner to make the catch, which causes him to "lean" on the runner, AFTER making the catch (key point), which causes both to fall to the ground.

We cant see the play, but just playing Colombo here, the circumstantial evidence , to me, is too great to ignore.

Runner back to the base, standing up....................reach around the runner standing on 2nd......then the shortstop AFTER catching the ball makes contact, off balance....taking them off the base. Shortstop has the ball, then makes contact...guilty your honor.