NCAA Rule Question - Appeal Play

[Durham]

If this were OBR, I would agree. But there is no mention of continuous action in any NCAA material. And the rule simply says if they err during an appeal, then they lose the right to appeal. Does it not?

[johnnyg08]

A point that is not covered in the NCAA rule book defers to OBR. Most interpretations are not found in the rule book which is why one can't umpire effectively if they only read the rule book. In fact, I'm not sure if the words "continuous action" appears in the OBR either.

[Dave Reed]

The term "errs" is not defined. NCAA rules use the term in connection with appeals twice:
8-6b
(3) The defensive team receives only one chance on an appeal. In the case of multiple appeals, if the defense errs during its first appeal attempt or any base runner advances, the defense loses its right to appeal any runner at any base.
and
(5) If the defensive team errs on an appeal play and the ball remains in live-ball territory, the appeal will be allowed if:
(a) The ball immediately is returned to the base being appealed; and
(b) No runners advance on the misplay. If a runner(s) advances, no appeal
shall be allowed.

So in NCAA, "errs" could mean an overthrow which goes into dead ball territory, but it can also mean one which stays in live ball territory.

Does "err" include overthrows made during continuous action? For OBR, clearly not, according to MLBUM 5.2 and the J/R passage johnnyg08 provided.

It is the same in NCAA, and we can see that based on the phrase "or any baserunner advances" in (3) above. In NCAA during continuous play, if the defense appeals one runner leaving early without error, but some other runner advances, we still allow additional appeals. But (3) says the defense loses the right to appeal any runner if a runner advances during the appeal, and that contradiction implies (3) only applies to after a break in the action.

[UmpTTS43]

Originally Posted by Durham

If this were OBR, I would agree. But there is no mention of continuous action in any NCAA material. And the rule simply says if they err during an appeal, then they lose the right to appeal. Does it not?

There is a passage in the NCAA rule book that says the rules are "essentially the same as for professional baseball". Once you take the rules differences out of the equation, if there is no NCAA AR, you apply the OBR AR's. This is one of those cases.

[Durham]

Originally Posted by UmpTTS43

There is a passage in the NCAA rule book that says the rules are "essentially the same as for professional baseball". Once you take the rules differences out of the equation, if there is no NCAA AR, you apply the OBR AR's. This is one of those cases.

If that is the case then that is good enough for me. My goal every game is to not lose a protest. I don't care if I had one every game, I just never want to lose one. It just stinks that we have an interp that isn't an AR in here some where. The reason being is that some time, you might have a protest committe that only has the rule book available to them and nothing else. So some obscure interp that the book doesn't even mention, such as continuous action, could bite someone one day and that sucks. I remember Jimmy teaching us about continuous action and I know it exists, but it is just sad that a book that until recent got reprinted every year and now every two years, doesn't contain a reference to it.

And as for the comment about the ineffectiveness of using only the rule book in ones umpiring, I have to very respectively disagree. I have worked with guys that barely pass rules tests every year and guys that know every piece of literature on the subject. The most effective umpires are simply those that know how to apply what they know, to whatever degree that is. It also is the basis for testing us, that and a few mechanics questions. And truth be told about mechanics, you learn those on the field and not the book.

[johnnyg08]

I see what you're saying...but when there are authoritative opinions, versus how one might apply the rule...it could vary widely. Being just a rule book umpire most of the time will get you through a lot of games and many years...but you talk about not wanting to lose a protest, then that's why you have AO's to support your ruling. How likely are you to lose your protest if you cite an AO from Fitzpatrick, or Paronto, or Evans...you won't...and yes, you won't find those in the rule book.

Remember, even if you'd happened to lose a protest...it doesn't always mean that you're wrong. It depends on where you're working and the level of ball you're working...I don't know where you umpire...but if your protest goes to some of the TD's that I read about on here, losing a protest might be an option...heck w/ some of the TD's I read about on on here, Hunter, Harry, or Jimmy could lose a protest.

[Durham]

[rcaverly]

Originally Posted by johnnyg08

...heck w/ some of the TD's I read about on on here, Hunter, Harry, or Jimmy could lose a protest.

Just ask Tim McClelland.