Suggested Reading Material

[SAump]

Originally Posted by jdmara

Is that right? Am I missing something?

In which post do you have an opinion/interpretation from Jim Evans, Wendelstedt boys, etc? I can't find it when I read through the thread

-Josh

Your missing the part of rule 3.15 interference, kill it and award/penalize. IOW out at 3B {Intent}, return to 3B (Unintent) and play on (no interference {meaning NONE}. This is justified by rule but you do not choose this option. The ball went directly from ODH to DBT and you state "unintent by offense on throw amounts to no interference of ODH, {see 3.15 BC at 1B}." You play on and award 2 bases because of the "bad" throw. R1 scores from 3B and B/R scores or stops at 3B. {Unsupported by SLAS, et all }

The defense is horrified by the umpires reaction that a hustling B/R at 2B may be allowed to walk in through no fault of their own. Doing what they practice without ODH interference. I maintain the ODH is not excused for his actions. Although he is a non-participant, the court record indicates that he indeed lost that status sometime between ODH and hit by a thrown ball. I maintain the real definition of NO interference has been sanitized to protect ODH.

Although I state, treat as ball boy or coach and kill it. Others say allow play to continue. The umpire crew also enforced penalty for interference by a member of the offense team. Everyone of you maintain they erred. I maintain their ruling is justified by rule. You do not provide valid support to justify play on. I state you weave a bunch of small parts into a whole. It sounds good, but it falls apart on paper. Its been a task to get you boys to accept the black and white parts of a book. You insist on providing the gray matter for discussion. This is the actual opposite of the rising fast ball discussion. SAump supporting C&T of the game and you supporting "inventions of fantasy" baseball.

Roder
(1) blatantly and avoidably hinders [ a fielder's try to field a fair or catchable batted ball or ] thrown ball. A coach must try to avoid a fielder trying to field. If he tries to avoid, but contacts a fielder, it is not interference. In most cases, a coach who does not try to avoid contact with a fielder will have interfered. [5.08] [7.11]

Pete Booth and DG brought this up for consideration and both were told that it did not apply because of NO possible "play" occurring at TOI. That is one of many invalid buzzwords designed to absolve ODH from "participation" in the OP. SLAS provides rule support removing the fuzziness from the words like unintentional, play, home plate area, bat in hands, ODH-batboy, etc to employ 7.11. The ODH has to clear the ODC (BRD), not the bat (unsupported). There is no evidence supporting Matt's comments about coaching at HP (unsupported), although substantiated by Bobbybannaduck, rule 7.09d still applies to the OP..

[GA Umpire]

As I stated in the other thread, call INT on the bat. Throw the SOB out of the game until it can learn to keep its a$$ out of the way. Make the ODH get a new bat until his other one can behave better. Remove the runners. Put the 3B coach on 3rd. Put the 1B coach on 1B. Let them run and try to score. And, tell F3 to make better throws or get off the field as well. Tell F2 to learn to get in front of that bad throw or he will join F3.

Did I miss anything other than what the correct call is?

[GA Umpire]

Originally Posted by SAump

Roder
(1) blatantly and avoidably hinders [ a fielder's try to field a fair or catchable batted ball or ] thrown ball. A coach must try to avoid a fielder trying to field. If he tries to avoid, but contacts a fielder, it is not interference. In most cases, a coach who does not try to avoid contact with a fielder will have interfered. [5.08] [7.11]

Why do you manipulate what is written to fit what you want?

Should read as blatantly and avoidably hinders a fielder's try to field a [fair or catchable batted ball or ] thrown ball.

Or, if you prefer:
blatantly and avoidably hinders a fielder's try to field a fair or catchable batted ball OR blatantly and avoidably hinders a fielder's try to field a thrown ball.

[SAump]

Originally Posted by GA Umpire

Why do you manipulate what is written to fit what you want?

Should read as blatantly and avoidably hinders a fielder's try to field a [fair or catchable batted ball or ] thrown ball.

Or, if you prefer:
blatantly and avoidably hinders a fielder's try to field a fair or catchable batted ball OR blatantly and avoidably hinders a fielder's try to field a thrown ball.

I am willing to discuss this if you promise not to state the catcher didn't need to occupy that space.

Originally Posted by SAump View Post
Roder
(1) blatantly and avoidably hinders [ a fielder's try to field a fair or catchable batted ball or ] thrown ball. A coach must try to avoid a fielder trying to field. If he tries to avoid, but contacts a fielder, it is not interference. In most cases, a coach who does not try to avoid contact with a fielder will have interfered. [5.08] [7.11]
Why do you manipulate what is written to fit what you want?

Would you rule any differently in the OP if we replace the thrown ball contacting ODH with the ODH accidentally contacting the catcher 10 to 15 feet from HP?

Instead of satirical quips, change fielder to monkeys, it doesn't affect your outcome anymore than the OP. PITA!

(1) blatantly and avoidably hinders [ a monkey's try to field a fair or catchable batted ball or ] thrown ball. A coach must try to avoid a monkey trying to field. If he tries to avoid, but contacts a monkey, it is not interference. In most cases, a coach who does not try to avoid contact with a monkey will have interfered. [5.08] [7.11]

It is physically impossible to interfere with a fair batted ball in the OP, not a thrown one.
If a runner unintentionally interfered with a fair batted ball, is he protected because it is impossible for him to accidentally interfere with a throw?

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by SAump

Your missing the part of rule 3.15 interference, kill it and award/penalize. IOW out at 3B {Intent}, return to 3B (Unintent) and play on (no interference {meaning NONE}. This is justified by rule but you do not choose this option. The ball went directly from ODH to DBT and you state "unintent by offense on throw amounts to no interference of ODH, {see 3.15 BC at 1B}." You play on and award 2 bases because of the "bad" throw. R1 scores from 3B and B/R scores or stops at 3B. {Unsuppported by SLAS, et all } ...

Slow down...Breath...I did not mention in my post (that you cited) ANYTHING about 3.15...I just asked for a summary of the original play (so I could bring it up to some local people) and then commented I could not find an opinion/interpretation from Jim Evans, Wendelstedt boys, etc as your post seemingly led me to believe.

I haven't personally insulted you so you need to just take a breath and read the post. I am not attacking you. I don't ask questions to trap you, I have better things to worry about then entrapping you into a frivolous argument.

If you have the time, feel free to let me know if I have all the facts in my summary of the play

-Josh

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by jdmara

If you have the time, feel free to let me know if I have all the facts in my summary of the play

Josh,

Here is a summary of the play, transcribed by our own Mr. Umpire on another forum:

"R1, R2, no outs. Batter hits ball to RF for a hit. R2 scores easily. By the time F9 is getting the ball in, R1 is rounding 3B. F3 gets the throw and turns and throws to F2. F3's throw is off line and is about 12 to 15 feet towards the 1B dugout side of HP. During all of this, the on deck batter has come to pick the bat up. He has the bat in hand when the off line throw hits it and goes out of play. There was no intent by the on deck batter to hit the ball or even get in the way."

This is a fair and accurate description of the OP from the deleted thread, which was originally posted by Tim C (and deleted by Tim C. )

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Josh,

Here is a summary of the play, transcribed by our own Mr. Umpire on another forum:

As I don't post on any other forum, must be a different Mr. Umpire

Sincerely,

Mrumpire

[GA Umpire]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

As I don't post on any other forum, must be a different Mr. Umpire

Sincerely,

Mrumpire

That would be me. You and Mr Umpire on this forum stole my name. So, I had to make a different one.

So, I use your alias on other forums so they think it is you and come yelling at you.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by GA Umpire

That would be me. You and Mr Umpire on this forum stole my name. So, I had to make a different one.

So, I use your alias on other forums so they think it is you and come yelling at you.

All this time I thought I was arguing with this guy! Cut that out!!!

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

All this time I thought I was arguing with this guy! Cut that out!!!

I would be the one who knows NOT to say, "by the waste side."

[SAump]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

As I don't post on any other forum, must be a different Mr. Umpire

Sincerely,

Mrumpire

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve View Post
Josh,

Here is a summary of the play, transcribed by our own Mr. Umpire on another forum:
As I don't post on any other forum, must be a different Mr. Umpire

Sincerely,

Mrumpire

SDS is technically correct, which part of his statement do you dispute?

"There was no intent by the on deck batter to hit the ball or even get in the way."

5.08 However, if the coach interferes with a thrown ball, the runner is out.

JEA - if an overthrow should touch a coach, the umpire should determine if the coach used his best efforts to avoid the overthrow and/or fielder or whether his actions were palpably designed to interfere.

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Josh,

Here is a summary of the play, transcribed by our own Mr. Umpire on another forum:

"R1, R2, no outs. Batter hits ball to RF for a hit. R2 scores easily. By the time F9 is getting the ball in, R1 is rounding 3B. F3 gets the throw and turns and throws to F2. F3's throw is off line and is about 12 to 15 feet towards the 1B dugout side of HP. During all of this, the on deck batter has come to pick the bat up. He has the bat in hand when the off line throw hits it and goes out of play. There was no intent by the on deck batter to hit the ball or even get in the way."

This is a fair and accurate description of the OP from the deleted thread, which was originally posted by Tim C (and deleted by Tim C. )

Thanks Steve...that's all I was looking for

-Josh

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Josh,

Here is a summary of the play, transcribed by our own Mr. Umpire on another forum:

"R1, R2, no outs. Batter hits ball to RF for a hit. R2 scores easily. By the time F9 is getting the ball in, R1 is rounding 3B. F3 gets the throw and turns and throws to F2. F3's throw is off line and is about 12 to 15 feet towards the 1B dugout side of HP. During all of this, the on deck batter has come to pick the bat up. He has the bat in hand when the off line throw hits it and goes out of play. There was no intent by the on deck batter to hit the ball or even get in the way."

This is a fair and accurate description of the OP from the deleted thread, which was originally posted by Tim C (and deleted by Tim C. )

Wait a minute, you left all the part that says, "at your discretion you may say that the play happened at HP because it will lead to record breaking threads".