Catch question- Bizzaro world play

[asdf]

How about we use a little common sense and understand that this would be nothing more than an attempt to (contrary to why rules are created) put one team at an unreasonable disadvantage.

If I am working this game, the ball is dead and I am placing runners where they need to be placed...

R3 scores, R1 & R2 stay put, BR is out.

Let 'em protest......

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by asdf

If I am working this game, the ball is dead...

No reason to kill the ball.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by asdf

How about we use a little common sense...

In my experience, what follows this expression is some umpire's idea of how to resolve a situation when he doesn't know the rules.

Your post is consistent with my experience.

[asdf]

Originally Posted by mbyron

In my experience, what follows this expression is some umpire's idea of how to resolve a situation when he doesn't know the rules.

Your post is consistent with my experience.

My experience tells me that this is an intentional act that circumvents the intent of the rules by creating an unfair advantage to one team.

I don't need this printed in black and white to understand this.

No protest board worth their salt would uphold this.

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

No reason to kill the ball.

While killing the ball may prevent a ball being subsequently thrown out of play and basees being awarded, it also prevents the double or triple play previously mentioned.

Instead of sending runners back or taking runs/outs off the board, you take control this situation before anything else goofy can take ocurr.

[umpduck11]

Originally Posted by mbyron

In my experience, what follows this expression is some umpire's idea of how to resolve a situation when he doesn't know the rules.

Your post is consistent with my experience.

Something involving invoking 9:01C, usually....

[celebur]

Originally Posted by asdf

How about we use a little common sense and understand that this would be nothing more than an attempt to (contrary to why rules are created) put one team at an unreasonable disadvantage.

So. . .it's unreasonable to expect runners to know that they can leave base after the caught fly ball is first touched???

Originally Posted by asdf

My experience tells me that this is an intentional act that circumvents the intent of the rules by creating an unfair advantage to one team.

It may be intentional, but it doesn't circumvent the intent of the rules because they've been specifically written to prevent exactly this. This is only an unfair advantage if you also consider unequal rules knowledge among the players to be an unfair advantage.

Leave the ball live, and rule on whatever plays transpire. There is no need to kill it and/or place runners.

[MD Longhorn]

celebur, you must be envisioning something different than we are. So I'll spell it out.

Imagine a medium to shallow fly to left. Bases loaded, 1 out. If LF catches this and R1 takes off, he's dead meat. So he stays. LF then begins this intentional juggle thing - not catching it, but maintaining control. If R1 takes off after the touch, LF can simply catch and nail this guy at home. So he stays. LF get the ball all the way to shortstop, drops it, and gets an easy DP. Further, all your concentration seems to be on R1 - say R1 does scamper home, but R2 and R3 would be morons to try to advance on the touch. LF gets the ball all the way to shortstop and drops it - DPing R2 and R3. R1's run doesn't count now anyway.

THIS is the scenario we're discussing and saying we'd (by various methods depending on who is posting) find a way to prevent the INTENT of the rules from being circumvented. And this has nothing to do with rules knowledge by the players or coaches... assume that all players involved know ALL the rules...

[celebur]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

celebur, you must be envisioning something different than we are. So I'll spell it out...

You're absolutely right. Thanks for spelling it out!

[asdf]

Originally Posted by celebur

So. . .it's unreasonable to expect runners to know that they can leave base after the caught fly ball is first touched???




It may be intentional, but it doesn't circumvent the intent of the rules because they've been specifically written to prevent exactly this. This is only an unfair advantage if you also consider unequal rules knowledge among the players to be an unfair advantage.

Leave the ball live, and rule on whatever plays transpire. There is no need to kill it and/or place runners.

1) Never said it wasn't. It is however, unreasonable to expect the runners to watch a fielder intentionally juggle a ball for the sole purpose of getting a cheap double or triple play.

2) What rule specifically allows this action to take place?

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by asdf

2) What rule specifically allows this action to take place?

You've got to be kidding. No rule specifically allows any action to take place. The rules prohibit certain defined actions (OBS, INT, illegal bats, etc.), and allow everything else.

[asdf]

Originally Posted by mbyron

You've got to be kidding. No rule specifically allows any action to take place. The rules prohibit certain defined actions (OBS, INT, illegal bats, etc.), and allow everything else.

Interpretations, however, can allow for specific and prohibit specific actions.

If you think just because it's not specifically listed in the rule book, then an action is legal, you are wrong.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by asdf

If you think just because it's not specifically listed in the rule book, then an action is legal, you are wrong.

I think that the rules prohibit all illegal baseball actions. They fail to prohibit things like poisoning an opponent or digging a trench around 2B, but that is irrelevant to the case in point.

You still have no rules basis for your position.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by mbyron

They fail to prohibit things like poisoning an opponent...

I've always let that one go anyway.

[asdf]

Originally Posted by mbyron

I think that the rules prohibit all illegal baseball actions. They fail to prohibit things like poisoning an opponent or digging a trench around 2B, but that is irrelevant to the case in point.

You still have no rules basis for your position.

You won't find anything in the rules about a runner advancing from 1st to second on a delayed double steal (runner on 3rd) by performing backward hand springs, yet I think you are savvy enough to see that this is an illegal act.