Batter Runner proceeds to second with R1 on first.
 

Fed Rules. Runner at first no outs. Batter hits a fly ball to CF (can of corn). Runner stays at 1st and the batter runner proceeds to 2nd. The 2nd baseman getting the throw from the center fielder turns and sees this runner and throws the ball toward 2nd. It is an overthrow to the right of home plate. Runner from first goes to 2nd.
Is this interference from a retired runner? Do I have to judge intent on this play or is it handled the same way whether intentional or not?

Can of corn on this one for me, since I've got that T-shirt. I don't have the reference, but the FED interp is essentially this: It's up to the defense to know what is going on, and the situation you've described is NOT interference on the offense.

We have a local HS team that routinely does this under the guise of "hustle" - we're convinced as umpires here that they do it to try to draw a throw, but there is nothing illegal about the B/R running, even passing another runner. I issued the coach a friendly warning (it was a preseason tournament game - a glorified scrimmage) when I first saw them do it about three years ago, but after looking it up afterwards, found that it was not illegal.


It certainly doesn't look good, and usually looks intentional. Intent, as I recall, does not matter, and is especially hard to prove in this case.

I'm sure you mean nothing illegal about a retired runner passing a teammate. Otherwise, the BR would be out.

I can't find it in the book, but if FED follows OBR on this point, it is explicitly legal to continue to run the bases after being put out.

Yep, meant a retired runner passing a teammate. Thanks for clarifying!

I know I've read a case play in FED on this very topic, but don't have my books with me. I assume it is still in there.

I looked and didn't see it. Of course it might be there nonetheless...

Defense should be telling F4 "no runner", but trying to deke a throw as a retired batter should come under the heading of "unsportsmanlike like conduct". This is especially true if BU in B gives a clear and vocal declaration of that's a catch. The goofy basstard should be pulling up by then.

Fed case play 8.3.3I explicitly says it's legal.

JM

Left hand point, right hand hammer, "He's out!"

Whatever the defense does after that is on them.

Huh...I actually forgot I had this team tonight, after discussing this today. And yes, they still do it...basically, they are coached to run everything out to (or at least past halfway) to second base on all balls, no matter how routine.

Didn't confuse the defense in tonight's game.

So, what is the penalty for your make believe rule?

Mr. Tyler umpires in Fantasy Land where anything is possible if you just believe and click your red base shoes 3 times.

I said *should* not *would*.

Are you trying to make a point, or trying to pick nits?

Your posts usually read like this to me: BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, etc.

This is more along the lines of what is common at the HS level. Just don't pass the runner if the ball isn't caught.

I've actually seen red base shoes.

Before people get too much in a tizzy, it was a youth game with a high-school age umpire using his game cleats for his umpire shoes.

On a can of corn????? Really???

You're slipping there. I accidently used A instead of B for the position of the BU in my post, also.

And this wrong because...................?

Try this link. RID

That link is wrong on so many levels.

The statement that you would give a clear and vocal declaration of catch on a can of corn, i.e. an obvious catch situation, is only wrong on one level.

Pardon moi for not being anally retentively challenged. Is it just tooooo much trouble to give a clenched fist, with a simple, "That's a catch"?

You're not? Damn, you sure sound like it. Giving a big hearty "That's a catch" for a routine fly ball out to CF sounds about as anal as you can get on a baseball field. A simple arm signal is the proper mechanic. Sorry if that is too anal for you. Now, OTOH, if the CF is running for the ball, and the catch/no catch is in ANY way in question, then a verbal signal is not only a good idea, but also the proper mechanic. So it just boils down to the original play, which was described as a routine can of corn, in which all participants could readily see for themselves that a catch was imminent. Now, if the CF were to drop said can of corn, then the BU should holler "No catch." I do hope you see the difference here and that you are not too AR challenged to see it!:)

When in the hell did you get the word hearty from? Nobody said anything about an over the top call of "That's a catch". It's just your imagination running away with you.

Okay, leave out the word hearty (and big). Change it to audible. Rest of statement stands. Now, explain why it is necessary to tell ANYBODY on the field that you have a catch? Aren't they all seeing what you are?

I thought we had a no-quoting-the-troll policy around here! My ignore can't work if you keep it up, Steve.

That said, the quoted posts make me happy to have left the ignore on. Dumberer and Dumbererer. Someone should remind TB that there's a REASON for the mechanics we are supposed to use. There's no reason to make an audible call at all on an obvious play. Like the new guy in our association who likes to verbally call foul on every tap back to the screen or out of play. Might as well wear a hat that says ROOKIE instead of TASO (or whatever your local hats say). All you're doing by verbalizing the catch on a routine play is notifying coach that you are clueless, and that can't be conducive to having a good day out there.

SDS and Steven Tyler arguing. Baseball season has arrived.

You do need to tell your partner. On a can of corn, it's an oral signal to your partner and no signal. But on a routine out at first (by more than a couple of steps) its a signal and no oral call.

It would be interesting to see how the offense would react if the defense let the ball drop. I assume the BR who had passed R1 would be out anyway, this time for passing. But it might confuse a lesser experienced R1 into running and maybe getting picked off.

What? Oral signal to your partner? Never heard of this one. I hope my partner never feels the need to do anything orally with me.:rolleyes:

Why on earth would your partner need a "verbal" signal when he is watching the same baseball that you are watching?

"Hey partner, he just caught the ball, in case you are looking at that woman in the stands and not the play.":confused:

VoiceOfLG:

Your situation is the ideal example of why it is idiotic for a HC to require "Charlie Hustle" actions by his players.

It has been my experience that on deep fly balls to the outfield, B/R almost always touches 1B before the ball is caught. Therefore, in the Original Play (OP), if B2 has passed R1 before F8 caught the Fly Ball he would already had been out.

That said, whether B2 is out before or after he passes R1, NFHS Casebook Play 8.3.3 Situation I allows B2 to act in a manner that could induce the defense to make a play on a Retired Runner. The B/R knows he is out and he should get off the field in the most direct manner that will not interfere with anyother defensive play being made.

MTD, Sr.

It's my hope my partner isn't watching the same baseball I am. If I'm watching the baseball, I hope he's watching the runners. In any fly ball that I have catch/no catch responsibility, I'm letting my partner know the status: "That's a catch, Steve." or "It's down, Steve." On a tag-up chance, I might even say "Touch, Steve" when the ball is touched.

This is more along the lines I was referring to in the first place, but then all the rocket surgeons/brain scientists started nit picking. I sort of read the OP to mean the batter was digging hard to 2B as if he was R1 trying to tag up, and go to 2B. From there the thread started steadily snowballing downhill.

Your ignore is working. You're as ignorant as they come.

You say these things when you are the BU with your back to your partner? I do my responsibilities too, but I always know the status of the baseball. You don't give that responsibility away just because you have other responsibilities. Yes, as the PU, I will say those first two things when the BU is starting in A and busting in on the play. That is because the BU is running with his back to the baseball. Plus, we are only talking here about a can of corn to F8. That subject hasn't changed as far as I'm concerned, because that is what I have been predicating my responses on.

It is still BOTH umpires responsibility to know what is happening with the baseball, because nothing can happen without it. No, if I don't have the ball responsibility, then I don't stare down the ball, but I sure don't ever wait for my partner to tell me what is happening with it, I make sure I know for myself..

Actually, as in reality, all the real umpires started correcting you, and you get all sorts of pissed off when that happens, as we know. You are the one who posted a link to a lice ridding website. Real classy. Aside from your childish posts, this thread is doing quite nicely.

Oral means spoken. Verbal means with words so it could be written or spoken. I work in a profession where the difference matters. Sorry the precision isn't (apparently) impoirtant to you.

And, of course I'm talking about plays where the partner needs to know but isn't watching the ball. Most common with no runners on and when PU has the ball -- "that's a catch, Steve" lets your partner know that he can peel off and head back to A.

Used it last night with R1 and R3 and a ball in the V. As I (as PU) was headed toward third and glancing back to see R3 touch the plate, I heard my partner say "That's a catch, Caesar" and I didn't have to continue to third, pick up the runner and the ball, etc.

(And, frankly, your post and others by both Steve's in this thread is why I don't visit or participate more, here.)

So, "of course" you were talking about a completely different situation than the one being discussed, and we were supposed to know this how? Yes, in the situation with no runners and the BU is busting in on the play, you are correct. But this was not what was being discussed, and is what you must not have understood. We were discussing the BU making the call with R1, not the PU with no runners. You said in reply to Tyler:

"You do need to tell your partner. On a can of corn, it's an oral signal to your partner and no signal. But on a routine out at first (by more than a couple of steps) its a signal and no oral call.

The first part of this is incorrect, when talking about the BU with R1. There is no oral/verbal signal from the BU on a can of corn when the BU is in the middle of the diamond. That was my point.

I am sorry that MY precision is not important to YOU.

Professional mechanics:

No signal and no verbal (a/k/a "spoken") statement given when the catch is a "can of corn". [It only takes giving a catch signal and saying "catch" once on a can-of-corn on the professional level to hear some player/coach/manager say "no ****" (or something similar) to you.]

It is okay to say, "Jim, got a catch". [Where "Jim" is your partner.]

Both umpires should be watching the ball. However, the umpire(s) who have responsibility for any runner(s) should glance at the runners. "Watch the ball, glance at the runner(s)!" I teach several clinics a year with a former instructor at one of the umpire schools and he has told me that that phrase is repeated every day for six weeks at school.

Mirriam-Webster on line.

Verbal.

3. Spoken rather than written



Want to argue about what "rather than" means?

Uhhhh, incorrect. And I just wrote that, I didn't verbalize it.

I did some some checking, and this is the mechanic at pro school. Since I never aspire to attend pro school, and 95% of my training is at the FED level, this has never came up. However, it kind of blurs my mind that the reason for this mechanic is to possibly avoid a stupid snide comment. To me, it equates to the casual out signal when a batter is out by 20ft. Anyway, if they do say something similar, it gives me the chance to use my patented head and eye roll mechanic.

Thanks, lawump, for providing an answer other than, "Because I said so."

There is always the popular "because it's the right answer" answer too.

I believe the casual out signal when the batter is out by 20ft. is because there is a possibility that F3 was not quite on the base, and a nonchalant signal reaffirms that the BR was truly out, and nothing funny happened. On a can of corn, there is no other outcome than out if the fielder reaches in and pulls the ball out, so no need for a signal.

Since you got an A in logic in college, you should know your analogy makes no sense. If you're an F3, and too stupid to touch the base when a batter is out by 20ft, you need to grab some pine time, and watch and learn how the game is played.

Did this play happen to you? I remember you mentioning what a stellar standout (what else is new?) at the position you were.

Oh, ignore list, how I love thee. Let me count the ways. Ignoring the most ignorant is bliss.

I doubt it. You're like the punch drunk boxer who doesn't hear the bell at the end of each round, and keeps coming back for more.