HS Trick Play
 

I saw no fake tags here.
Bases loaded 2 outs. F1 fakes throw to 2nd base. Defense acts like the ball went int CF. R3 runs home and is thrown out at the plate.
I thought it was interesting.
Amazing High School Baseball Pick-Off (Video) - MLBFanCave.com | MLB.com: Fan Cave

It's the old U. of Miami fake pick off. Perfectly legal, well known, still occasionally works.

I saw a variation of this in one of my games.

R2 on 2B. The catcher came up firing as if he were making a pick-off throw to 2nd base after a pitch. The throw was right at the left shoulder of the pitcher who non-chalantly gloves that throw while the middle infielders dive for the non-existent ball and the outfielders go chasing nothing. Pitcher moves toward third as if to be the backup ... which absolutely sells the play! Meantime R2 and 3B coach buy into the ruse and the coach waves R2 toward 3B ... where the pitcher is waiting for him and makes a tag.

The best part is the team that got duped was giving me trouble all game. Their coach was a real @$$ and one of their players had decided earlier in the game they didn't want to be there anymore.

Ran into the opposing coach later and he told me they practiced that play everyday during workouts, but they had never run it in a game before. As he told me, "Then again, I never came across a coach I wanted to run it on until today." :D

Love it

Rita

Great story.

If the defense is yelling get the ball or something like that, does this play become verbal obstruction?

No. The offense has a responsibility to know the location of the ball.

To make a call of obstruction, I have to ask myself "What are they obstructing?" The offense is not being tricked into stopping their run. They are running completely under their own effort and with no impediment to their progress. They made horrible base-running decisions.

Verbal obstruction? No such thing. Can't even imagine such a thing.

I believe it is in the FED rule set.

Just checked and didn't find that term... where do you see it?

2-22-1
ART. 1 . . . Obstruction is an act (intentional or unintentional, as well as physical or verbal) by a fielder, any member of the defensive team or its team personnel that hinders a runner or changes the pattern of play as in 5-1-3 and 8-3-2; or when a catcher or fielder hinders a batter as in 5-1-2b, 8-1-1e, 8-3-1c and 8-3-2. When obstruction occurs, the ball becomes dead at the end of playing action and the umpire has authority to determine which base or bases shall be awarded the runners according to the rule violated (Exceptions 8-4-2c, 8-4-2d).

Casebook 2.22.1 Situation A has a related play and uses the phrase "verbal Obstruction".

This play so well known it has a name, based on the college team to make it famous.

For example, a defensive player couldn't yell "back" like a first base coach.

That is illegal under FED rules.

We had training at a state HS meeting years back in Michigan telling us drop it on a fly ball and such things were also covered under verbal obstruction.

But wouldn't that be verbal interference?

Rita

Why yes, yes it would!

Dave, I disagree that this case is relevantly similar. 2.22.1A is a case where the runner is advancing and the defense (verbally) attempts to STOP his advance. That is correctly ruled obstruction because the advance has been hindered.

The Miami fake pickoff is legal deception intended to induce a runner to BEGIN his advance. This is not obstruction and is legal at all levels.

As long as the defense doesn't yell "back, go, that was a foul ball" or something that is actually directed to the offense, there is no verbal obstruction. The defense yelling, "Get the ball!" is not directed to the offense and as another said, it is the offense's job to know the game situation and where the ball is. Add to that, the base coaches should be on their toes looking at what is going on.

This play is 100% legal.

+1000

I have been arguing these two points till I'm blue in the fingers on another board. I will just add that the difference between Verbal Interference (2-21-1) and Verbal Obstruction (2-22-1), is that for VI, confusing the defense is illegal, whereas VO, confusing the offense is not illegal. Trick plays are legal. To be Verbal Obstruction, the obstruction must be in relation to 5-1-3 or 8-3-2, which is in relation to during an intentional walk, when awarding bases to runners, or when a runner is hindered advancing or returning to their base. Trick plays, such as the fake pickoff in this case, or the hidden ball trick, etc., are NOT illegal under any rule set.

Was thinking about two things at once...Rita's correction is well noted! (Red face)

Yes, I agree, the casebook play isn't relevant to the OP.

It occurred to me later that you might simply have been pointing out a case play pertaining to verbal obstruction, which is a uniquely FED concept and seemed to be raising some questions for some posters. Sorry if I misinterpreted your post.

If obstruction as defined in rule 2-22-1 states, "Obstruction is an act (intentional or unitentional, as well as physical or VERBAL) by a fielder, any member of the defensive team or its team personnel that hinders a runner or changes the pattern of the play".



"Changes the Pattern of play"

That basically covers baiting a runner at third to try to steal home doesn't it?

No. There was no play to change. I don't think you know what "pattern of the play" means.

Why don't you explain it then, everyone who posted says it isn't obstruction because the runner wasn't hindered, that is not the only restriction to this rule.

To me "changes the pattern of play" would be something out of the ordinary flow of the game. This bush league BS, is not customary nor usual pattern of play in my book.

Pattern of play, in my view, means changing a play that is already in progress. In the case of egging a runner to attempt a steal or advance, the play has not begun yet, so this is legal. However, if a runner is already running, or in movement, any action that causes him to advance or retreat is altering the pattern of play.

Doesn't the play begin once the umpire says play ball?

No. "A PLAY" has a definition.

First off, this was a freakin' MOVIE!!! You are basing a ruling on what you saw in a work of fiction?

Second off, what the pitcher in the movie did was a balk, since he faked a throw to first base while engaged to the pitcher's plate. So, again, it's a MOVIE!!!

The course of the play in 2-22-1 begins when the runner is advancing to or returning from a base during a play. The ball is made live when an umpire calls play, and remains in play until the ball becomes dead again. This does not indicate the start of any particular play.

Thank you for posting this - it saved me from blowing my freaking top! What idiot would base rules from a movie?

Say it ain't so!! Lindsay Nielson in Naked Gun ISN'T a training video??

Or his cousin Leslie either!:)

bigjohn,
There is a case play that covers the OP, and it certainly doesn't support the notion that defense's actions in the OP would "Change the course of play".

6.2.4 SITUATION E: With R1 on second base, F1 wheels and fakes a throw to second on a pickoff attempt. As R1 dives back to the base, F4 and F6 run into short center field as if chasing an errant throw. R1 seeing this, takes off for third base where he is thrown out by F1. RULING: This is legal and is not considered unsportsmanlike conduct. R1’s base coaches have the responsibility to keep R1 informed.

Hey Ozzy...your posts always remind me of Yosemite Sam when he blows his stack! The Looney Tunes Show: Merrie Melodies - "Blow My Stack" - YouTube

Careful, or someone will send that link to his local umpire association as a training video.

It's not really fiction. The movie is based on the Miami play. Hell, Miami even had the groundskeepers involved prtetending to get out of the way.

Just posted the video as a funny. I see a case play now and I am satisfied. I never said it was anything, I am not an official and was just asking questions. :D

Yes, him too.

When I was in California, I once had the opportunity to meet and talk with Robert Hays, who starred with Leslie, and he related that Leslie at times had a very bad flatulence problem. I mention this for no real reason other than it sometimes seems to fit with some posts around here.

Did the pitcher disengage the rubber in the Miami play? I am not familiar with this play is why I ask. The pitcher did not do that in the movie.

Bob, I only met you for a few moments. But I think we could be friends.

Rita

Back to the football board for you - -where you have at least a *chance* of making a valid point.

Here is the "Miami Play" from 30 years ago............There was no groundskeeper involved since it happened at the CWS.

Honoring the 1982 National Champs: The Grand Illusion - HurricaneSports.com - The University of Miami Official Athletic Site

So, the pitcher did step off the rubber before throwing in real life, but in the movie, they left that little chunk of realism out. Oh, that and they made it about the Twins and the Mariners. I guess college baseball wouldn't draw enough moviegoers.

More myth spreading.

My mistake - it was the bullpen players, not the groundskeepers.

I think so too, Rita!

No credit to Miami found
 

Play recently happened on video in California

High school baseball trick pick-off play | It's Always Sunny in Detroit

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/highsc...104518770.html

Article states California team, video states Minnesota, go figure.

ROTFALMAO!!

You owe me 1 coffee!

He he he...:)

Spam reported.