just pondering

[kbaerslt]

had runner at 1st and 3rd last night with 1 out. Batter at the plate had a 3 and 2 count. The pitch comes in and the runner on first is stealing. Batter checks his swing and ball four is called. Catcher still throws to second and the tag is applied to the runner sliding in. i make no ruling on the play and the shortstp asked what happened. I replied with ball four. When i turned around my partner comes to me on the check swing and i give it a safe, nothing big. My question is if i would of call the check swing a strike for the swing would i have to call the R1 out because he was tagged before he reached second and therefor no longer protected by ball four? i cannot think of the sitution i would of had to deal with if that would of happened. this was a Legion ball game.

[Umpire_Jeremy]

The correct mechanic would be as you did...

watched the play VERY CLOSELY...turned around to look at your partner and wait for the appeal (I assume that you expected an appeal from him) and give your decision.

If you think he went you ring him and then call the runner out on the steal. Shouldn't have too much of a problem, especially in a legion game where, at least around here, most of the coaches know the rules pretty well. You, in no way, put the runner in danger.

I think that you did it correctly.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by kbaerslt
had runner at 1st and 3rd last night with 1 out. Batter at the plate had a 3 and 2 count. The pitch comes in and the runner on first is stealing. Batter checks his swing and ball four is called. Catcher still throws to second and the tag is applied to the runner sliding in. i make no ruling on the play and the shortstp asked what happened. I replied with ball four. When i turned around my partner comes to me on the check swing and i give it a safe, nothing big. My question is if i would of call the check swing a strike for the swing would i have to call the R1 out because he was tagged before he reached second and therefor no longer protected by ball four? i cannot think of the sitution i would of had to deal with if that would of happened. this was a Legion ball game.

OBR: Call R1 out. See 9.02(c) CMT.

FED: IF the runner slowed down because of the ball four call (doesn't seem likely in this sitation), and that caused him to be out (he would have been safe otherwise), then you can leave R1 at second. Otherwise, he's out. 10-2-3l

[Boone]

I agree completely with Jeremy. Bang the guy at the plate. Turn, bang the guy at Second, then dump the coach when he gets in your face!

I however can't see in FED how we protect the runner just because he slows down. If batter is out on appeal, then the result of the play at second stands.

[PeteBooth]

Originally posted by Boone

I however can't see in FED how we protect the runner just because he slows down. If batter is out on appeal, then the result of the play at second stands.

FED rule 10-2-3l

The UIC will rectify any situation in which an umpires decision that was reversed has placed either team at a disadvantage.

If R1 after hearing Ball 4 slowed down and the call was then changed to a strike, obviously strike 3 stands for out number 2, but we do not record the out on r1. R1 would be sent back to first base.

Here's a FED case play to illustrate

FED case play 10-2-3H

With a full count on B1 and r1 on first base, B1 takes what appears to be a half swing. The PU calls Ball 4 and R1 upon hearing ball four then trots to second base. F2 throws the ball to F4 who tags r1 before he reaches base. F2 asks the PU to check with the BU to see if B1 did in fact attempt to hit the pitch. The BU indicates that B1 did swing at the ball.

RULING: The PU will declare B1 out and return R1 to first base. The UIC can rectify any situation in which an umpire's decision that was reversed has placed a base runner in jeopardy.

Pete Booth

[Boone]

Wow. What a crappy rule! nice citation though!

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Boone
Wow. What a crappy rule! nice citation though!

Not at all a crappy rule, imho.

It recognizes that both the umpires and the particiapants are amateurs, that mistakes will be made, and that they should be rectified "fairly," when possible.

It's one of the embodiments of the CS&FP principle.

[Porch Dog]

Ok Bob I'll bit and probably show my ignorance but what is the CS&FP principle? Porch Dog

[Gold_Spark]

If you just didn't make a strike 3 or ball 4 call immediately? Let the play at second happen and then make your ruling?

[kbaerslt]

you do let the play happen. but you need to know what the call is at the plate before you can make a ruling on the play at second.

[BJ Moose]

To a degree, this is part of the OBR as well. Remember the WS or playoff game some time ago. Typical.. R1, 3-1 or such, runner TOOK off, and U2 called him OUT on the steal. Runner took a step off the base, got TAGGED, meanwhile, U2 learns that pitch was BALL 4.

They let Runner stay.. I think game even got protested. (Anyone remember this one).

Originally posted by bob jenkins


Not at all a crappy rule, imho.

It recognizes that both the umpires and the particiapants are amateurs, that mistakes will be made, and that they should be rectified "fairly," when possible.

It's one of the embodiments of the CS&FP principle.

[Gee]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bob jenkins
Not at all a crappy rule, imho.

"It recognizes that both the umpires and the particiapants are amateurs, that mistakes will be made, and that they should be rectified "fairly," when possible.

It's one of the embodiments of the CS&FP principle."
_________________________________________________----
OK, there are some plays where the amateur umpire will foul up and should be corrected but I don't believe this should be one of them.

This checked swing thing happens in OBR and Major League Baseball. There are case plays that show the runner is out.

The umpire in the original sitch used the correct mechanics and the runner is meat. EXCEPT IN FED 'CAUSE IT'S IN 'DERE BOOK.

Baseball rules are not always fair and they are certainly not always alligned with common sense. Fed does it again. G.

[Boone]

I think its crappy because that player should be going all out for that steal. If he lets up that his biz and yeah for the defense for gunning him out.

And BTW. The PU calling ball 4, requesting help and being reversed is not a "mistake"

[PeteBooth]

Originally posted by Boone

I think its crappy because that player should be going all out for that steal. If he lets up that his biz and yeah for the defense for gunning him out.

And BTW. The PU calling ball 4, requesting help and being reversed is not a "mistake"

Well we each have our own opinions on this so let's just stick with the rules then.

You may rule the way you think in a game played by OBR rules but NOT HS using FED rules.

I personally think it's a good rule. Sometimes the player doesn't slow down on his /her own but the third base coach will yell out it's ball 4 or why make a kid slide if they don't have to.

Players REACT to an umpires call and I guess we get mixed up in nomenclature, but even if you call it a "mistake" the bottom line is that the call Was REVERSED from Ball 4 to Strike 3 and in FED, we don't penalize either the offense or defense for an umpire's reversal.

This thread is why IMO the BU should simply mimic the PU's call (on this type of play) as it avoids a potential mess.

Pete Booth

[Boone]

Three and two count on the batter. check swing, pitch in the dirt.

PU: Ball Four. No he didn't go.

Batter: removes shin guard protector and begins to trot to first

Catcher: simultaneously tags the runner then asks you to go for help.

BU: "Yeah he went" and rings him up.

According to the same logic you are applying above, we should protect that batter because if we hadn't said ball four he would have busted *** up to first and might have been safe.