Trapped fly balls video review.

[gordon30307]

Originally Posted by LilLeaguer

My point is that with less than 2 outs, R3 is going to be tagging up on a fly to the outfield. Whether the ball is caught or trapped, the fielder will have the ball in possession, and R3 will have to decide whether to advance to home at her own risk. Chances are the fielder will throw home in either case as well.

So, most of the time, both offense and defense will play the same way (whether they think the ball was caught or not) with regards to R3.

To be explicit, say U1 originally calls the batter out on a fly into right field. R3 attempts to score and is put out at the plate. On further review, the crew decides that the ball is trapped. I think in most cases it would be correct to assume that R3 would have tried to run on the hit, and continue to uphold the out at home. Same for most other plays with R3 and less than 2 outs.

I am not defending the use of replay at any level for this type of review. I'm just saying that R3 will typically be the least of the worries for the crew that has to change such a call on review.

OK same situation less than two outs it's ruled a no catch R3 is safe at home (doesn't tag) upon further review it's ruled a catch. What do you do with R3?
If you put him back at 3rd how can you assume he wouldn't have tried to tag and score? Continuing action doesn't lend itself well to replay.

[umpjong]

Originally Posted by gordon30307

OK same situation less than two outs it's ruled a no catch R3 is safe at home (doesn't tag) upon further review it's ruled a catch. What do you do with R3?
If you put him back at 3rd how can you assume he wouldn't have tried to tag and score? Continuing action doesn't lend itself well to replay.

I dont have one bit of a problem with the major league umpires using their best judgement in placing runners in this situation. (I wouldnt have a problem with NCAA umpires doing it either, but its not necessary yet) Even though there is no contesting these decisions by the umpires, I will bet that there will be few instances where a legitimate question arises. I also believe it will probably be pretty much a non issue next year.

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by umpjong

I dont have one bit of a problem with the major league umpires using their best judgement in placing runners in this situation. (I wouldnt have a problem with NCAA umpires doing it either, but its not necessary yet) Even though there is no contesting these decisions by the umpires, I will bet that there will be few instances where a legitimate question arises. I also believe it will probably be pretty much a non issue next year.

I agree, Jon. Placing runners is something umpires are sometimes called upon and most of us seem to do fine.

I can't tell you how many times I have had a coach say that the outfield fence has gaps at the bottom and asks how we'll handle it. I tell them to keep running and we'll sort it out. The same thing should happen in MLB with the replay in question. The CWS will have limted replay available too this year and it is about time. There's an awful lot riding on making the correct call.

[LilLeaguer]

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

I agree, Jon. Placing runners is something umpires are sometimes called upon and most of us seem to do fine.

I can't tell you how many times I have had a coach say that the outfield fence has gaps at the bottom and asks how we'll handle it. I tell them to keep running and we'll sort it out. The same thing should happen in MLB with the replay in question. The CWS will have limted replay available too this year and it is about time. There's an awful lot riding on making the correct call.

I'm not sure those cases are parallel. A batted ball going through a gap is a mandated 2-base award. No umpire judgment in placing anybody. Also, "just keep running" is probably bad advice to a coach on a catch/no-catch controversy.

Obstruction is a closer situation, I think, and we have years of practice and some official guidance for many particulars there. Even so, we still have longish threads on forums such a this one about rarer situations. The MLB umpires may be making it up as they go along, which will be interesting.

[umpjong]

Originally Posted by LilLeaguer

The MLB umpires may be making it up as they go along, which will be interesting.

I feel you are seeing way to much here. The depth of experience in those four man crews will nullify any "rare" situations that may come up. I will stick with it being a non issue next year. The only gray areas that might be of any issue will be tag ups at third and I think you will see a coordinated effort to handle these with a strong consistency (which should aid in this being a non issue).

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by LilLeaguer

I'm not sure those cases are parallel. A batted ball going through a gap is a mandated 2-base award. No umpire judgment in placing anybody. Also, "just keep running" is probably bad advice to a coach on a catch/no-catch controversy.

Obstruction is a closer situation, I think, and we have years of practice and some official guidance for many particulars there. Even so, we still have longish threads on forums such a this one about rarer situations. The MLB umpires may be making it up as they go along, which will be interesting.

1) We have some crazy fields and equally wierd ground rules. I have had caoches claim that they have a pole down right field and if it hits or goes into the protected area, it is three bases. That is just one example and we have had threads dedicated to others. We use our judgement and so will the MLB guys.

2) I don't see a problem with replay reversing a catch or vice versa. If the guy tagged and is thrown out on a play that, after review, is ruled no catch. He is still out. If the guy doesn't tag and there is a catch, after review, he chose to leave early and is penalized for his bad judgement.

3) I'm pretty confident that the MLB guys will have guidelines and be skilled enough to handle the drama. Being second guessed for exercising judgement is part of the game.

[UmpTTS43]

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

If the guy doesn't tag and there is a catch, after review, he chose to leave early and is penalized for his bad judgement.

How can you penalize a player for his actions when it was the umpire's initial call that provided the necessary information? No tag up is required when a ball is not caught. Bad idea.

R1. Fly ball hit to F9 who dives for the ball. R1 goes half way to second. Ball is ruled "no catch". R1 advances to 2nd, BR to 1st. Replay overturns the call and it is now ruled a catch. What do you do with R1?

Calling him out on appeal for not properly tagging up would be an idiotic and unreasonable thing to do.

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by UmpTTS43

How can you penalize a player for his actions when it was the umpire's initial call that provided the necessary information? No tag up is required when a ball is not caught. Bad idea.

R1. Fly ball hit to F9 who dives for the ball. R1 goes half way to second. Ball is ruled "no catch". R1 advances to 2nd, BR to 1st. Replay overturns the call and it is now ruled a catch. What do you do with R1?

Calling him out on appeal for not properly tagging up would be an idiotic and unreasonable thing to do.

You are probably correct about replay being unfair to those who aren't clairvoyant or more observant than the umpire who made the original call.

FWIW, players are penalized for bad calls all of the time. Ask Armando Galarraga, Mike Napoli, Michael McKenry, Michael Barrett, Josh Paul, Ron Gant, Chuck Knoblauch, Jorge Orta - the list goes on with infamous calls that would probably qualify as idiotic and unreasonable.

I could live with an umpire not penalizing the runner who didn't tag when the ball was initially ruled "No catch". The runner may have reacted to the call rather than the play itself. However, I have seen more than a couple runners take off thinking that the ball was dropped only to have an out called. Those runners anticipated the call and didn't wait for me "to provide information". It even happens in the MLB and more often than not involves my beloved Cubs.

Happy holidays.

[LilLeaguer]

Originally Posted by gordon30307

OK same situation less than two outs it's ruled a no catch R3 is safe at home (doesn't tag) upon further review it's ruled a catch. What do you do with R3?
If you put him back at 3rd how can you assume he wouldn't have tried to tag and score? Continuing action doesn't lend itself well to replay.

Yes, if R3 goes halfway home on a trouble ball to the outfield, that will be a problem. My point is that this will actually be rare; usually R3 will be tagging up in anticipation of the ball being caught. At least I think that is what coaches would expect.

Clearly, I would have to be there, and I doubt I ever will be*, but if R3 really did go down the line on an outfield fly, I might take that as an indication that R3 would not have tagged up on a caught fly ball. So, on further review, I might return R3 to third base. I expect that a little later, I might be ejecting somebody from the offense.

So no, I am not a proponent of expanding instant replay this way. Here's a scenario more likely, I think, to cause grief.

One out, R2. Line drive to right field, and R2 goes halfway to third. F9 dives to his left, and U1 rules a catch. R2 trots back to second base. But, on further review, the play is ruled a no-catch. Now, do you place R2 at third? Out at home on the throw? Score the run? In all of that, where does B/R get placed?

Depending on the location of the trap, it might most likely be B/R to second, score R2. Now I might get to eject somebody from the defense.

I wonder if anybody from MLB actually reviews tape from games where these situations have occurred to see how they would play out in real life?

* I'll never be an MLB umpire, but I suppose it's possible that I'd someday be working a LL World Series, and they are also a little whacky about replay.