Delayed Dead Ball play

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I have yet to see an actualy MLB/OBR rules citation with regard to the OP, nor have I seen and NCAA rules citation. I would be very happy to see rules citations from both NCAA and MLB/OBR so as to compare them with NFHS.MTD, Sr.

How, then, would you propose the umpire "nullify the effects of the obstruction" in this case, in an NFHS game?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by bigda65

mtd,

do you think that calling the out "nullifies" the obstruction of the runner?

He has scored, ball is dead, under nfhs rules is he even allowed to come and retouch his awarded bases?

Da

DA:

NFHS R8-S2-A3: Any runner who misses a base while advancing may not return to touch it after a following runner has scored. NOTE: Any runner who misses the first base to which he is advancing and who is later called out shall be considered as having advanced one base.

The answer to your question is no.

MTD, Sr.

Originally Posted by umpjim

according to childress in his brd, ncaa and obr both have official interps. Childress recommends fed umpires treat as in ncaa. Ncaa uses umpire judgment that the obstruction occurred near enough the base that it could not be conveniently touched.

UmpJim:

Excusing the two times that I had to correct a former NFHS Basketball Rules Editor when the said Editor gave a patently incorrect interpretation as an Official Interpretation, any interpretation that I give is not official (even though 99.999,999,...% of my basketball interpretations were and are correct, ) until the Rules Editor agrees in writing. That said, while Carl's interpretations may be correct, until the NFHS makes a ruling on such a play, Carl's interpretations can only be applied with the knowledge that the NFHS may say otherwise.

There is no play in the current NFHS Baseball Casebook that covers the situation being discussed in the OP. The search engine in the NFHS's publication is great for this sort of thing.

MTD, Sr.

Originally Posted by md longhorn

how, then, would you propose the umpire "nullify the effects of the obstruction" in this case, in an nfhs game?

MD Longhorn:

I am not sure why I included NFHS R8-S3-A2 in my OP, other than to remind everyone that umpires can protect an obstructed runner for more that one base under NFHS Rules.

MTD, Sr.

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

DA:

NFHS R8-S2-A3: Any runner who misses a base while advancing may not return to touch it after a following runner has scored. NOTE: Any runner who misses the first base to which he is advancing and who is later called out shall be considered as having advanced one base.

The answer to your question is no.

MTD, Sr.







UmpJim:

Excusing the two times that I had to correct a former NFHS Basketball Rules Editor when the said Editor gave a patently incorrect interpretation as an Official Interpretation, any interpretation that I give is not official (even though 99.999,999,...% of my basketball interpretations were and are correct, ) until the Rules Editor agrees in writing. That said, while Carl's interpretations may be correct, until the NFHS makes a ruling on such a play, Carl's interpretations can only be applied with the knowledge that the NFHS may say otherwise.

There is no play in the current NFHS Baseball Casebook that covers the situation being discussed in the OP. The search engine in the NFHS's publication is great for this sort of thing.

MTD, Sr.





MD Longhorn:

I am not sure why I included NFHS R8-S3-A2 in my OP, other than to remind everyone that umpires can protect an obstructed runner for more that one base under NFHS Rules.

MTD, Sr.

So there is no guidance in the FED supplemental interps. There is guidance in the other codes. The other code's rules could be used to call the runner out but we have interps that allow you to judge otherwise. Because FED hasn't addressed it you choose to rule other than how the other codes rule? Edited to add: Or perhaps you are rationalizing your original post because you were not aware of the NCAA and OBR interps?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by umpjim

So there is no guidance in the FED supplemental interps. There is guidance in the other codes. The other code's rules could be used to call the runner out but we have interps that allow you to judge otherwise. Because FED hasn't addressed it you choose to rule other than how the other codes rule? Edited to add: Or perhaps you are rationalizing your original post because you were not aware of the NCAA and OBR interps?

UmpJim:

First, the thread's OP did not state under which rules set the game was being playe. I based my opinion on my stated assumption that the game was being played under NFHS Baseball Rules. That said, I am not ratioalizing my opinion in my OP dependent upon whether I was or was not aware of the NCAA or MLB/OBR interpretations.

It does not matter what the other rules codes say about the matter. For expample if a play happened in a basketball game being played under NFHS Baketball Rules, and there was no applicable Rules or NFHS Casebook Plays [or even NCAA Approved Rulings or Casebook Plays, assuming the NCAA Basketball Rules were the same (those who have read my posts on the Basketball Forum will understand the historical context from which why I might look to the NCAA Basketball Rules)], but the NBA/WNBA Rules Book does cover such a play, I am still prohibited from using the NBA/WNBA Rules to make a decision.

Therefore, while Childress and Wendelsteidt's books are informative, they do not have "the force of law" for a game played using NFHS Baseball Rules.

Obviously, the thread's OP is a play that should be submitted to the NFHS Baseball Rules Committee for its opinion.

MTD, Sr.

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

UmpJim:

First, the thread's OP did not state under which rules set the game was being playe. I based my opinion on my stated assumption that the game was being played under NFHS Baseball Rules. That said, I am not ratioalizing my opinion in my OP dependent upon whether I was or was not aware of the NCAA or MLB/OBR interpretations.

It does not matter what the other rules codes say about the matter. For expample if a play happened in a basketball game being played under NFHS Baketball Rules, and there was no applicable Rules or NFHS Casebook Plays [or even NCAA Approved Rulings or Casebook Plays, assuming the NCAA Basketball Rules were the same (those who have read my posts on the Basketball Forum will understand the historical context from which why I might look to the NCAA Basketball Rules)], but the NBA/WNBA Rules Book does cover such a play, I am still prohibited from using the NBA/WNBA Rules to make a decision.

Therefore, while Childress and Wendelsteidt's books are informative, they do not have "the force of law" for a game played using NFHS Baseball Rules.

Obviously, the thread's OP is a play that should be submitted to the NFHS Baseball Rules Committee for its opinion.

MTD, Sr.

And what do you think that opinion would be?

[Rich]

They do in my games, Mark. They do in many other umpires' games, too.

[jpgc99]

It seems to me that the NFHS baseball rules are arbitrarily different for almost no reason from higher codes. Furthermore, they are often deficient and lacking in depth and interpretation.

In football and basketball, this is not the case (at least to this extent). There are clear rules differences between NCAA and Fed in both football and basketball, and most can be explained. I don't agree with all the explanations (for example, Fed football wants to minimize exceptions so their penalty enforcement is much simpler than NCAA). In baseball, the fed rules (and fed mechanics) simply appear to be sub-par for no reason.

Therefore, most umpires at the high school level use CCA 2-man mechanics and rely on supplemental rules explanations from MLB, NCAA, etc.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

My original ruling in my OP was slightly correct because there were two outs at the start of the play. I went back to my OP and edited it, by adding a P.S. with the correct ruling.

Corrected Ruling.: R1 is out on appeal for missing 3B; R2's run does not score because R1's baserunning infraction is the third out of the inning; and B5's at bat is a fielder's choice (if you are scoring at home, ).

MTD, Sr.


P.S.: NFHS R8-S2-A6k and R9-S1-A1, Exception c or d (my preference is c but d applies equally).

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by umpjim

And what do you think that opinion would be?

UmpJim:

I don't know because I have not yet finished composing the email to the OhioHSAA Director of Officiating--Baseball who will know doubt make a preliminary ruling and forward it on to the NFHS Baseball Rules Editor in Indianapolis for an final ruling.

MTD, Sr.

Originally Posted by Rich

They do in my games, Mark. They do in many other umpires' games, too.

Rich:

Here in the great State of Ohio, OhioHSAA baseball umpires follow NFHS Baseball Rules. An umpire who intentionally fails to follow NFHS Rules and Intepretations by applying rules interpretations from other codes will soon find himself not umpiring, and losing tournament assignments.

MTD, Sr.

Originally Posted by jpgc99

It seems to me that the NFHS baseball rules are arbitrarily different for almost no reason from higher codes. Furthermore, they are often deficient and lacking in depth and interpretation.

In football and basketball, this is not the case (at least to this extent). There are clear rules differences between NCAA and Fed in both football and basketball, and most can be explained. I don't agree with all the explanations (for example, Fed football wants to minimize exceptions so their penalty enforcement is much simpler than NCAA). In baseball, the fed rules (and fed mechanics) simply appear to be sub-par for no reason.

Therefore, most umpires at the high school level use CCA 2-man mechanics and rely on supplemental rules explanations from MLB, NCAA, etc.

jpgc99:

As I said to Rich above, failure to follow NFHS Baseball Rules, Interpretations, and Mechanics can definitely lose an umpire games and tournament assignments. The umpires in almost all first and second round tournament games are evaluated, and the umpires in all Sweet 16 Games and beyond are evaluated. Applying NCAA or OBR rules, interpretations, or mechanics in an OhioHSAA baseball games especially in tournament play will get you in trouble.

MTD, Sr.

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

UmpJim:

I don't know because I have not yet finished composing the email to the OhioHSAA Director of Officiating--Baseball who will know doubt make a preliminary ruling and forward it on to the NFHS Baseball Rules Editor in Indianapolis for
MTD, Sr.

The last time somebody asked FED for an interp based on a contentious issue in a forum regarding projected subs it was reported that no interp was required.
What if they tell you that no interp is required because everyone umpiring baseball knows that a missed base caused by obstruction should not be ruled a missed base?

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

While H.S. baseball may not account for the majority of amatuer baseball played in the youth age level, I would bet dollars to donuts that for the vast majority of H.S. baseball umpires, the vast majority of the games that they umpire use NFHS rules.

That's not what you said. You're moving the goalposts.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

UmpJim:
As I said to Rich above, failure to follow NFHS Baseball Rules, Interpretations, and Mechanics can definitely lose an umpire games and tournament assignments. The umpires in almost all first and second round tournament games are evaluated, and the umpires in all Sweet 16 Games and beyond are evaluated. Applying NCAA or OBR rules, interpretations, or mechanics in an OhioHSAA baseball games especially in tournament play will get you in trouble.

If there is no interpretation, then this is the only way to go. Otherwise you'd have every man for himself and MSU as things went along. No one is losing games of any importance in Ohio or anywhere else by using OBR to fill gaps where FED has not done their job.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Matt

If there is no interpretation, then this is the only way to go. Otherwise you'd have every man for himself and MSU as things went along. No one is losing games of any importance in Ohio or anywhere else by using OBR to fill gaps where FED has not done their job.

I'd tell a coach that the obstruction caused the missed base and we'd go back to playing ball and EVERYONE would forget about the call.

The rules and case book have holes you can drive a truck through. It's one reason I carry the BRD to every game I work. Not that I'd pull it out on the field, but I've found myself looking stuff up before and after games many times over the years.

[jpgc99]

Originally Posted by Rich

I'd tell a coach that the obstruction caused the missed base and we'd go back to playing ball and EVERYONE would forget about the call.

The rules and case book have holes you can drive a truck through. It's one reason I carry the BRD to every game I work. Not that I'd pull it out on the field, but I've found myself looking stuff up before and after games many times over the years.

Exactly. As I said above, baseball FED rules have many, many gaps. It is impossible to use only that material to umpire a game. Most umpires have no choice but to supplement their rules knowledge with materials from other sources. Ohio might not like it, but this is the reality.

[DG]

When I encounter a FED situation that does not seem to be covered by rule or case book, but I know is covered by MLB interpretation, I apply the MLB interpretation, as I would in this case. There are many rules that are not be interpreted literally, but with the intent the rule exists.