The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #31 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 21, 2012, 02:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by dash_riprock View Post
Me too, although I'd be hard-pressed to come up with a rule to support keeping the runner at 2nd.
"Rule 10.3.1 - Hey, you can't do that."
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 21, 2012, 02:45pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by dash_riprock View Post
In the Hrbek play, I believe it was ruled that the force of a hard (and legal) tag caused the off-balance runner to lose contact with the base. That's not the case here. The runner's foot kept contact with the base before and throughout the tag. He was about to pop up directly over the base when he was barreled by the fielder's body.

I'm killing it and keeping the runner at 2nd. If the coach comes out and wants rule support for my not calling the runner out, I'm going to tell him quietly that if he forces me to do that, it can only be type A obstruction and the runner will get 3rd (which he cannot protest).
I'm keeping him at 2nd as well --- tagging a player and having him come off the bag is completely different from being knocked off the bag by the body of the fielder.

However, taking this to OBS is just wrong. For many reasons - the most obvious of which being that the fielder had possession of the ball.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 21, 2012, 02:50pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrUmpire View Post
Depends on what you feel is relevant. There have been many, many outs called when a tag or bump results in a runner coming off the bag.


"Cross body block"? No. The fielder fell while making a normal baseball move. He did not throw a block. Runner is out at MLB level.
It doesn't matter that it was a normal baseball move... it matters that his body hit the runner, completely changed his direction and pushed him off the bag. This being called an out is a HORRIBLE precedent. (And no, this is nothing like the Hrbek play).
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 21, 2012, 08:15pm
JJ JJ is offline
Veteran College Umpire
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: IN
Posts: 1,122
How can anyone - even the calling umpire - justify calling this runner out?
My, oh my!

JJ
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 21, 2012, 08:49pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder View Post
It doesn't matter that it was a normal baseball move... it matters that his body hit the runner, completely changed his direction and pushed him off the bag. This being called an out is a HORRIBLE precedent. (And no, this is nothing like the Hrbek play).
Yep. It amazes me that anyone would call this an out. I think it's one thing to have it happen quickly and make the call on the field. But, after really thinking about what happened, you are just asking for trouble if you call this an out.
Reply With Quote
  #36 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 21, 2012, 10:00pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: depends on your perspective
Posts: 697
Three pages deep, and the best we can come up with is opinions - good ones at that - but opinions, just the same. No supporting rules or case studies. I guess the situation is one of those that is right in the middle of a gray area.
Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 21, 2012, 11:10pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLH17 View Post
Three pages deep, and the best we can come up with is opinions - good ones at that - but opinions, just the same. No supporting rules or case studies. I guess the situation is one of those that is right in the middle of a gray area.
How about "Common Sense and Fair Play, 1.01?"
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 22, 2012, 08:11am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLH17 View Post
Three pages deep, and the best we can come up with is opinions - good ones at that - but opinions, just the same. No supporting rules or case studies. I guess the situation is one of those that is right in the middle of a gray area.
It has always struck me as odd that there's no rule that says you can't push a player off a base while in possession of the ball. There's interps. There's common sense, and there's unwritten understandings... but seems this should be in black and white.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #39 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 22, 2012, 10:42am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Urbana, IL
Posts: 26
This play seems a reversal of fortunes compared to crashes at the plate. I feel that if your game allows crashes at the plate, unless there is a written directive to the contrary, this crash at 2nd is "okay" and the out is righteous. In the games I (and most on this board) work, I think the call should be safe. No way do I want to open the Pandora's box of allowing fielders to crash the runner in an attempt to knock him off the base, whether intentional or not.

On a separate line of thinking, at what point do you consider MC (in FED of course) on the part of the fielder?
Reply With Quote
  #40 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 22, 2012, 02:24pm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Lakeside, California
Posts: 6,724
Quote:
Originally Posted by D Ray View Post
This play seems a reversal of fortunes compared to crashes at the plate. I feel that if your game allows crashes at the plate, unless there is a written directive to the contrary, this crash at 2nd is "okay" and the out is righteous. In the games I (and most on this board) work, I think the call should be safe. No way do I want to open the Pandora's box of allowing fielders to crash the runner in an attempt to knock him off the base, whether intentional or not.

On a separate line of thinking, at what point do you consider MC (in FED of course) on the part of the fielder?
You are comparing apples and flight attendants. The crash at the plate happens when the catcher has the ball or is receiving the ball. The runner is still doing his job, which is trying to touch the plate or dislodge the ball. The fielder, after applying a late tag, knocked the runner off a base that he had already acquired, and that's not part of his job.
__________________
Matthew 15:14, 1 Corinthians 1:23-25
Reply With Quote
  #41 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 22, 2012, 02:53pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Urbana, IL
Posts: 26
SDS - I agree with you. I was trying to divine why this would be acceptable in MLB. I was not very clear as I opened my reply. By allowing the out, it broadens the job of the fielder. The whole play smells. The defense did not execute in order to earn the out. This is not like the Hrbek play
Reply With Quote
  #42 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 23, 2012, 09:13am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Twin Cities MN
Posts: 8,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by D Ray View Post
...This is not like the Hrbek play
Do you guys consider the call on the Hrbek play to have been correct?
__________________
Tom
Reply With Quote
  #43 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 23, 2012, 10:22am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,050
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dakota View Post
Do you guys consider the call on the Hrbek play to have been correct?

Most seem to think so. I didn't think it should have been an out. He hauled Gant's leg off the base IMHO.
Reply With Quote
  #44 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 23, 2012, 10:34am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,620
__________________
Cheers,
mb
Reply With Quote
  #45 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 23, 2012, 10:36am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 1,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dakota View Post
Do you guys consider the call on the Hrbek play to have been correct?
At least it can be argued that Hrbek's tag knocked the runner off his base (resulting in an out). I don't think you can make the same argument with Beckham's "tag."
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Public Address announcer/ Play by play Terrapins Fan Basketball 34 Sun Dec 13, 2009 12:20pm
Force play or time play? Rita C Baseball 44 Sat Dec 05, 2009 10:12am
Force play or tag play dsbrooks1014 Baseball 3 Tue Apr 21, 2009 09:09pm
Play-by-Play Commentary FC IC Basketball 2 Sat Dec 21, 2002 12:28am
CBS play-by-play announcers: should they all be fired? David Clausi Basketball 6 Mon Mar 27, 2000 11:56pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:17am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1