Video, what do you have?

[chuckfan1]

YouTube - Eto-Roth Out (Baseball v. WAB)


College Game , So Calif
Ive shown this around a bit, and have gotten a few different responses.
- A couple say "nothing" as they believe R3 was trying to get to the plate, and nothing malicious, noting R3's actions to help F1 after the play.
--Possible malicious due to the elbow getting up there.
--INT on R3 for not trying to get to the plate, but instead going "at" the catcher and trying to dislodge..

What say you...

[UmpJM]

chuckfan,

From what I see on the video, I'll go with Door #1 - an out and nothing else.

JM

[jicecone]

Hey Chuck, still with Suffolk County?

I have a runner that still does not know how to slide and is clumsy too, play on.

[Forest Ump]

Originally Posted by jicecone

Hey Chuck, still with Suffolk County?

I have a runner that still does not know how to slide and is clumsy too, play on.

+1. Lousy slide. He's out.

[Rich]

Here's another interesting video:

YouTube - Balk-Lead RBI-Single (WC - Game 1)

Balk first, then a play at the plate at the end.

[UmpJM]

Rich,

I'm guessing a college game???

For the life of me, I'm not seeing the balk. (Could be the video angle, I guess - or maybe I'm just missing it.)

And why no obstruction on the play at the plate?

I did think the PU did a nice job dodging the on-deck batter/wannabe home plate base coach.

JM

[Forest Ump]

It look like the scenario that you posted a week ago. Catcher blocks access to the plate, drops the ball on tag, prevents the runner from reaching home. Obstruction for sure. I'm guessing no set on the balk. It must have appeared different to the BU than the video shows. Very close.

[Simply The Best]

Originally Posted by chuckfan1

YouTube - Eto-Roth Out (Baseball v. WAB)

--INT on R3 for not trying to get to the plate, but instead going "at" the catcher and trying to dislodge..

What say you...

No way on this option. No contact with F2...no problem.

[jicecone]

Not a "complete and discernable stop." Notice the difference between the first set and the next one. Some pitchers believe that if they snap the arms and hands into the set position, that constitutes a "stop." Wrong.

Play at plate, only watched once. In Fed I have OBS, in NCAA I have nothing.
In OBR, just kids play.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Here's another interesting video:

YouTube - Balk-Lead RBI-Single (WC - Game 1)

Balk first, then a play at the plate at the end.

I have no OBS in any code. F2 did not "deny complete access to the base."

[GoodwillRef]

Originally Posted by chuckfan1

YouTube - Eto-Roth Out (Baseball v. WAB)


College Game , So Calif
Ive shown this around a bit, and have gotten a few different responses.
- A couple say "nothing" as they believe R3 was trying to get to the plate, and nothing malicious, noting R3's actions to help F1 after the play.
--Possible malicious due to the elbow getting up there.
--INT on R3 for not trying to get to the plate, but instead going "at" the catcher and trying to dislodge..

What say you...

I am not dumping this kid.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by GoodwillRef

I am not dumping this kid.

Me either.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by GoodwillRef

I am not dumping this kid.

+1...perhaps interference but even that is a stretch I think. I'm good with play the bounce on this one.

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I have no OBS in any code. F2 did not "deny complete access to the base."

At the Chicago meeting, we were told that a runner is not given access if he has to slide through the fielder's legs. In this play, the runner has to do this. For Fed this would be OBS, the back sides of the plate are not considered acceptable targets for a runner attempting to score. 2-22-3 does not qualify partial or complete access. 2-22-1 Sit. C in the Casebook states the same thing - 'denied access', not complete access. If I am wrong Bob, please cite the Fed partial access exemption and I will amend my post.

F2 is protected in NCAA ball as the ball is arriving simultaneously to the slide and he had to occupy that position to recieve the throw. This is cited in the OBS clarification in the current supplement - page 8, play 3.

In OBR we have great baseball.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

At the Chicago meeting, we were told that a runner is not given access if he has to slide through the fielder's legs. In this play, the runner has to do this. For Fed this would be OBS, the back sides of the plate are not considered acceptable targets for a runner attempting to score. 2-22-3 does not qualify partial or complete access. 2-22-1 Sit. C in the Casebook states the same thing - 'denied access', not complete access. If I am wrong Bob, please cite the Fed partial access exemption and I will amend my post.

F2 is protected in NCAA ball as the ball is arriving simultaneously to the slide and he had to occupy that position to recieve the throw. This is cited in the OBS clarification in the current supplement - page 8, play 3.

In OBR we have great baseball.

8.3.2C "some access to the plate" (and, no, I don't mean the "back side")

8.3.2G(a) "blocks the entire base" vs. 8.3.2G(b) "blocks part of the base"

8.3.2L "partially blocking the inside edge of the base" and "did provide access to part of the base, even though it was not the part ... R1 wanted"