verbal interference ???

[PeteBooth]

Originally posted by woolnojg

If you are calling FED rules then enforce the rules, all of them, not just the ones you like.

IMO you have to be careful with the aforementioned statement.

There are those Nit-picken rules which are only enforced on the rarest of occassions. One such rule(s) are the unifirm rule. Are you going to tell a kid he /she can't play because they are not in proper uniform?

Then there is the 20 second rule for F1. I only enforced this rule once in my career thus far and that was because F1 was a real wise a**.

It is very difficult to put in words all rules that apply or exceptions to those rules. It is our job to KNOW those rules but more importantly How to apply the rules in a given situation

Ok you might say why does FED have a rule for Verbal obstruction? Simple There are occassions when it is to be enforced like the first or third base coach screaming at a player trying to make a catch.

You have to be Very careful about players saying get back and other such "things". I know there is a FED case play on this but again you need to KNOW when to enforce this.

Does that mean we pick and choose which rules to enforce and which rules to not enforce. IMO NO It means we KNOW when to call such infractions depending upon the situation.

Let me give you an example;

In FED if F1 takes his signs from F2 or the coach and NOT in contact with the pitcher's plate it is a balk with runners on base.

We had R1 and I had the dish. I noticed F1 taking signs while NOT in contact with the plate. I called TIME went to clean the plate and told F2 to tell his pitcher to get the signs on the rubber. No probelms the rest of the way.

Now technically speaking and according to rule I should have called a balk, but for Game management purposes IMO I was better off doing some preventive umpiring and NOT calling the strict rule of the book. It is THEIR game not mine.

Now if the defense gains an advantage while committing an illegal act or something aginst the rules that's a different story, but rules are a guideline and through Experience and Game managemnt we learn how to call a game without ruining it. How it sounds like a title to a book (right Papa C - GRIN)

Pete Booth

[woolnojg]

Tim C -
Sounds like you need to leave. You just want to pick a fight and that seems to be it. Can't tell you what to call in every situation because so many of them are HTBT. I use judgement in all situations.Curve ball in the dirt a strike?, maybe. Have to see the whole pitch. Do I call things out of the blue?, NO. They are in the book and I expect the coaches to know what they are doing. If it is a little thing, I bring it to their attention first and let them correct it. If they don't, their problem not mine.
I used to have some respect for your opinion Tim but, you seem to want to attck and pick on things that don't exist. Ridicule and sarcasm lend little to a discussion on a subject, but that is where you seem to want to be. Can't head back to McGriffs 'cause I've never been there. IF you can't stand a little disagreement then I sugest you head elsewhere.

[woolnojg]

Said I'd have to see the whole pitch. You never mentioned whether the batter struck at the ball or not.
You've told me much about your lack of interpersonal skills also.
Do I have all the answers, nope. Do you? Apparently not.

[woolnojg]

Tim -
You still haven't said whether the batter swung at the pitch. Swing or no swing it is still a call, ball or strike.
A "called" strike would imply that there was no swing. Yeah, I know, a subtle difference. That's why so many things are HTBT to get the whole situation.

[DownTownTonyBrown]

For those that are interested in the original post...

There are times when verbal obstruction is a proper call. Back, back, back to the runner at 2nd is probably not one of them... runner ought to be able to tell the difference in location of his coach at 3rd and F6 that is behind him. Further... Back, back, back doesn't create the obstruction (impede the runner); there must be some response from the runner... if the runner does nothing different, there has been no obstruction and hence no need for an official's call.

Now... times when the call would be appropriate... Shortstop yells for runner to slide coming into 2nd and then after the slide gets tagged out at third, or players in dugout yell for runner to slide at home and in either case the runner gets injured because of the unexpected need to slide... Obstruction is a proper call and an ejection is likely relevant too for the injury.


PS. It is truly amazing how some pitchers can get a pitch through the zone and have it bounce in the dirt before it gets to the catcher. Obviously could see it in a slow pitch softball game but how does one throw it at 70 MPH and make it drop 18 inches in the next 3 feet? I've seen them and I didn't call them strikes (I wanted to), but it is still amazing.

Life is short, my friends. Play ball.

[woolnojg]

Tony -
Agreed. In FED this could be a correct call. Verbal obstruction. Other codes don't carry this, so it would not apply there.
Have seen batters set up in the back of the box, with a 34" bat and their 36" arms. This can put the catcher 5' from the point of the plate. Lots of space there to drop one in.
Tim - to answer your question. Have not made that call since 2nd year. Can see that I might call it, probably not though. It is not up to any blue to decide that a rule can be ingored and not enforced by choice. If the sponsoring org. chose a rule book and didn't like a specific rule then they would modify it, done all the time by age levels. A blue can decide that the rule does not fit the situation by using judgement, about all of the facts at hand.
Usually the coach will get a warning between innings if a player is approaching the boundry of a rule. Then he can fix it, or not. But he has nothing to complain about when it gets called later on his player(s) or team. He knew and didn't fix it.

[GarthB]

Tony writes:

"There are times when verbal obstruction is a proper call. Back, back, back to the runner at 2nd is probably not one of them... runner ought to be able to tell the difference in location of his coach at 3rd and F6 that is behind him."

Then woolnojg replies:


"Agreed. In FED this could be a correct call. Verbal obstruction. Other codes don't carry this, so it would not apply there.

Let's review...

Tony says: "no obstruction." (And he's right)

Woolnojg says: I agree..that's obstruction."

I must have missed the sign post that said "Twilight Zone."

Doo doo doo doo/ doo doo doo doo