Obstruction

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by Fittske

From the First post....

With the score tied 2-2, Menchville had runners at first and second with one out. As Hunter Lewis dug in at the plate, Woodside’s Christian Burton charged from first base yelling “bunt” — even though Lewis had not squared to bunt.

Mays never delivered a pitch, but the home plate umpire called obstruction on Burton and awarded Lewis first base.

Which was a completely , absolutely, without question, misaaplication of the rules.

Not only was there no basis for the call/ruling, there would also have been no basis for the warning you are suggesting. You cannot possibly be seriously recommending to correct one ridiculous call by replacing it with another ridiculous call.

[Fittske]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

Which was a completely , absolutely, without question, misaaplication of the rules.

Not only was there no basis for the call/ruling, there would also have been no basis for the warning you are suggesting. You cannot possibly be seriously recommending to correct one ridiculous call by replacing it with another ridiculous call.

You can't honestly say that there was no basis for a call/ruling as you nor I was there to watch it unfold. Under most circumstances the player probably thought the batter might have been squaring to bunt, and as most players do they yell out "bunt!" as the pitch is delivered. Yeah This is perfectly fine, but sometimes 15-18 year old HS kids can be obnoxious and yell for the sake of yelling to be distracting. The plate umpire obviously felt that the players action required "some" call to be made. My only point was to say that the call was not and should never be OBS. If (and only if) in the umpires "judgment" the yelling of "bunt" by the fielder hindered or prevented the batter from hitting the pitch, or was done so in such a manner that the action was disruptive to the game, The umpire should have called "time" and nipped it in the butt (in this case in the form of a warning then ejection if the player continues to be distracting to the opposing teams batters).

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Fittske

You can't honestly say that there was no basis for a call/ruling as you nor I was there to watch it unfold. Under most circumstances the player probably thought the batter might have been squaring to bunt, and as most players do they yell out "bunt!" as the pitch is delivered. Yeah This is perfectly fine, but sometimes 15-18 year old HS kids can be obnoxious and yell for the sake of yelling to be distracting. The plate umpire obviously felt that the players action required "some" call to be made. My only point was to say that the call was not and should never be OBS. If (and only if) in the umpires "judgment" the yelling of "bunt" by the fielder hindered or prevented the batter from hitting the pitch, or was done so in such a manner that the action was disruptive to the game, The umpire should have called "time" and nipped it in the butt (in this case in the form of a warning then ejection if the player continues to be distracting to the opposing teams batters).

Nothing the player did constituted obstruction or any other rule violation. I don't have to be present at a game to know the rules. The PU kicked it, the association two-stepped to back him up, and the Compton commish was an incompetent boob. It's called baseball. This mamby-pamby touchy-feely approach to life is getting nauseating.

Hey batter, batter...SWING!!!

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by Fittske

You can't honestly say that there was no basis for a call/ruling as you nor I was there to watch it unfold. Under most circumstances the player probably thought the batter might have been squaring to bunt, and as most players do they yell out "bunt!" as the pitch is delivered. Yeah This is perfectly fine, but sometimes 15-18 year old HS kids can be obnoxious and yell for the sake of yelling to be distracting. The plate umpire obviously felt that the players action required "some" call to be made. My only point was to say that the call was not and should never be OBS. If (and only if) in the umpires "judgment" the yelling of "bunt" by the fielder hindered or prevented the batter from hitting the pitch, or was done so in such a manner that the action was disruptive to the game, The umpire should have called "time" and nipped it in the butt (in this case in the form of a warning then ejection if the player continues to be distracting to the opposing teams batters).

You either are not an umpire, or are simply clueless regarding the rules. Nothing you suggest is remotely appropriate.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

Nothing you suggest is remotely appropriate.

I have to disagree there Señor U. You forgot about "nipped it in the butt."

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

I have to disagree there Señor U. You forgot about "nipped it in the butt."

Yeah, I liked that, too.

I guess my first post in this thread should have been more vehement.

[cardinalfan]

I think it's pretty gutsy... or stupid... for the kid to charge in yelling 'bunt'. A sharp line drive to the teeth would make that seem like a really dumb play.

[Fittske]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

You either are not an umpire, or are simply clueless regarding the rules. Nothing you suggest is remotely appropriate.

Yes I am very much an umpire. I am not the one to brag but I am a very good umpire. I work hard I study hard, and I take pride in my craft. I was not posting to say "since he was wrong... this is what is right....." I merely gave an alternate way that the situation could have been handled that IS with in the rules and could have kept that umpire and any other young umpire out of hot water in the event they are faced with a similar situation. What I suggested, and it was only a suggestion, would have not resulted in miss application of the rules which happend here.

I have not seen one post from you in this thread that as been constructive. Yeah everybody who knows the definition of OBS knows the call was wrong, but making comments about my umpiring ability does not help those who come to this board looking for help.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Fittske

I have not seen one post from you in this thread that as been constructive. Yeah everybody who knows the definition of OBS knows the call was wrong, but making comments about my umpiring ability does not help those who come to this board looking for help.

The personal comments about you were not the initial response. First, people said that you were wrong to be charitable here: there's just no way to call obstruction on this play. You were also wrong to suggest a warning, as there is nothing against the rules on this play, and no provision for warning in the rules.

Your charity is admirable in trying to find some way to make the chuckleheads from the OP turn out to be correct. But your resistance to correction and unwillingness to apply the rules led to the personal comments about you. Apart from the question of their appropriateness, that's my take on what caused them.

So if you're sincere in your desire for help, be prepared to accept it in the form of statements to the effect that you're wrong. You can choose to accept that and learn from it, or you can get defensive and try to justify yourself. Some folks would not regard the second option as learning.

[Fittske]

Originally Posted by mbyron

The personal comments about you were not the initial response. First, people said that you were wrong to be charitable here: there's just no way to call obstruction on this play. You were also wrong to suggest a warning, as there is nothing against the rules on this play, and no provision for warning in the rules.

Your charity is admirable in trying to find some way to make the chuckleheads from the OP turn out to be correct. But your resistance to correction and unwillingness to apply the rules led to the personal comments about you. Apart from the question of their appropriateness, that's my take on what caused them.

So if you're sincere in your desire for help, be prepared to accept it in the form of statements to the effect that you're wrong. You can choose to accept that and learn from it, or you can get defensive and try to justify yourself. Some folks would not regard the second option as learning.

Thanks for the feedback. Much appreciated.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by mbyron

The personal comments about you were not the initial response. First, people said that you were wrong to be charitable here: there's just no way to call obstruction on this play. You were also wrong to suggest a warning, as there is nothing against the rules on this play, and no provision for warning in the rules.

Your charity is admirable in trying to find some way to make the chuckleheads from the OP turn out to be correct. But your resistance to correction and unwillingness to apply the rules led to the personal comments about you. Apart from the question of their appropriateness, that's my take on what caused them.

So if you're sincere in your desire for help, be prepared to accept it in the form of statements to the effect that you're wrong. You can choose to accept that and learn from it, or you can get defensive and try to justify yourself. Some folks would not regard the second option as learning.

Exactly. Not only was there nothing happening to rule against. There was nothing happening to warn about.

Doing either would be outside the rules.

Fittske's insistance to the contrary is what exposed him to criticism and made him appear to be, at best, inexperienced.

[Ump153]

Originally Posted by Fittske

I merely gave an alternate way that the situation could have been handled that IS with in the rules and could have kept that umpire and any other young umpire out of hot water in the event they are faced with a similar situation. What I suggested, and it was only a suggestion, would have not resulted in miss application of the rules which happend here.

Are you kidding? Your "alternative way" is no more "rule-correct" than what ocurred in the OP. You can't warn someone against doing something legal.

but making comments about my umpiring ability does not help those who come to this board looking for help.

Within those comments I observed a correct intepretation of the rule. That is not the case in you posts. Which is more likely to help a novice, the one that has the rule right, or yours?

[SAump]

But in this situation — tie game, no pitch having been thrown, it hadn’t happened before — why not issue a warning? Tell Burton to knock it off, tell Hare if it happens again a base will be awarded.

Sometimes common sense is the best rule.

What do I do if it happens again?

Well, a do over isn't called for here.
How about time?

Mays never delivered a pitch, but the home plate umpire called obstruction on Burton and awarded Lewis first base.

That's a balk.