About the 234 known OBR errors

[Tim C]

I am not sure what I hate most:

Trolls or,

What if's . . .

I know Larry fits both groups.

T

[UMP25]

But what if he's...

[TwoBits]

The rules and interpretations aren't secret, but many coaches and players don't care to know them.

Case in point: Last week I had a rec game under FED rules that ended on a text book interference call when R2 collided with F6 fielding a batted ball. Offensive coach went ballistic, complaining the fielder was in the baseline, his runner had right of way, never, EVER, seen such a bad call, yada, yada, yada. When I told him that if he would look at the list of rules myths posted at the concession stand and the rules reference that supported my decision, he responded with, "Well, I'm not going to look it up!"

The rules are there for all to see, but only umpires care to read them.

[Larry1953]

Well, the interpretations are not necessarily secret, but they do seem to be locked away in a holy tabernacle that only the high priests have access to - unless you want to part with $150 for a book that may not ne available to the general public or attend some special clinic to get one. For example, I have read in a book on OBR that the PU will typically call a ball hit in back of the plate a foul ball, even if it goes into fair territory because he is blocked from a good view on most of those plays. Does that come from an umpire's manual? It is no wonder that such a convention gets *******ized by the hoi polloi into the myth that a batted ball that hits the plate is foul.

[yawetag]

Originally Posted by Larry1953

I have read in a book on OBR that the PU will typically call a ball hit in back of the plate a foul ball, even if it goes into fair territory because he is blocked from a good view on most of those plays.

It doesn't matter where the ball hits, but it's location when it's first touched. Ergo, I don't care where it hits, but where the catcher fields it.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Larry1953

For example, I have read in a book on OBR that the PU will typically call a ball hit in back of the plate a foul ball, even if it goes into fair territory because he is blocked from a good view on most of those plays. Does that come from an umpire's manual?

I don't believe that any book says that. Perhaps you're misremembering something. Which book says that? It certainly does not come from an umpire manual.

[Larry1953]

mb, I believe it was in Nemec's book, not certain though. Or maybe SI's book on Knotty Problems.

Here is one from the J/R quiz that I think they got cometely wrong:

R3, R1, two outs. Ground ball up the middle, just past the pitcher's right side. The shortstop gloves the ball in front of second base and attempts to tag the sliding R1 instead of tagging the base. The tag is missed, but R1 slides past the base without touching it. As R1 scrambles back to the base, the shortstop tags him before he is able to return. R3 scored before the tag was applied for the third out (a 'time play'). The defense appeals that R1 missed second base, hoping to get a force out-an 'advantageous fourth out' - to negate the run.
The appeal is upheld; R1 is out and the run cannot score since the third out is now a force out.
The appeal is not allowed, the run scores.
The umpire should simply call R1 out for being out of the baseline, thus avoiding this whole mess.
The correct answer is "b" (the appeal is not allowed, the run scores), at least according to how professional umpires are likely to officiate this play. In theory, Jaksa and Roder agree with answer "a" (the appeal is upheld; R1 is out and the run cannot score since the third out is a force out), but felt it necessary to write the rule as it is likely to be enforced on the field, as in answer "b." The problem lies in the fact that the Official Rules do not specifically define what constitutes an appeal. As our quiz question shows, when appeals meet force plays, the rules are especially inadequate.

Imagine how strong an umpire you will be when you can see plays like this and get them right! You will not only get them right, but will amaze those around you by being able to give specific reasons for your ruling."

Well, I think Rule 7.12 says it is a third out force play and no runs score. Everybody knows that if a batter hits a grand slam with 2 outs and misses 1B and if the defense makes the appropriate appeal at 1B, that it reverts to "force play or batter makes third out at first" situation and no runs score. How is the J/R example any different? The R1 missed 2B in a force out situation and was out on appeal where you can tag the runner or the base, it is still a force. Say the F6 missed the batted ball grounder and the ball went into CF. R1 now at R2 gets up after his slide and continues on to 3B without ever touching 2B. Tagging the R2 now standing on 3B or throwing to 2B and stepping on the base would result in an out. And since it was a third out force out, no run would score, correct?

[Tim C]

Troll!

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Larry1953

How is the J/R example any different?

R1 was scrambling back to the base.

Originally Posted by Larry1953

Say the F6 missed the batted ball grounder and the ball went into CF. R1 now at R2 gets up after his slide and continues on to 3B without ever touching 2B. Tagging the R2 now standing on 3B or throwing to 2B and stepping on the base would result in an out. And since it was a third out force out, no run would score, correct?

He's still R1, and he would be out only if the appeal were granted. But otherwise you're correct.