Interesting Plays

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

To those wondering how that statement is reconciled with the prior statement regarding the actual width (measurement) of the plate, I offer the following explanation.

The bases (bags) are also a defined width; 15" square. But that (square) is a two-dimensional object, while the base has sides (ie, a height). If a runner is in contact with the side of a base, we consider that "on" the base, right?

Home plate has an edge (in black), which also can/should be considered a side to the plate. It is, partially, by the nature of the flare; it is not, partially, as it also extends beyond the stated dimension. Since there can be zero consistency in determining which part is side, which part is an extension, it is for consistency sake that the black be considered the side, and a runner touching ANY PART of the physical object is to be considered to be touching the plate.

Paraphrased, again from the prior ASA NUS regime leaders, HP and MB.

And the Clinic Guide. BTW, does anyone know if ASA still publishes a clinic guide for the UICs?

Originally Posted by Dakota

Kinda the reverse of the "hands are part of the bat" argument?

Well, same theory just from a different angle

[teebob21]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Kinda the reverse of the "hands are part of the bat" argument?

To hopefully add to the discussion: hands are removable from the bat without defacing either. The black cannot be removed from the plate without altering it. Nor can the sides of the bases be removed from them without alteration to the base.

Doesn't make one whit of difference in any of those cases, but it makes logical sense to me when I think about it this way.

[Crabby_Bob]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

And the Clinic Guide. BTW, does anyone know if ASA still publishes a clinic guide for the UICs?

There's a clinic guide included on the casebook CD.

Black is part of the plate.

[wrigleywannabe]

Sorry for the late replies. I've been really busy.

I called her safe. I went by what i last recalled reading. Our UIC said he would have went that way, as well.

I mentioned we play NFHS, but I think that is more of a "supposedly play" than anything else.

In times past, we've played NSA. I think some people do not realize there is a difference.

As far as why he was upset. I'm not real sure.

He did calm down, right away, when i explained I had to see the ball and there is no way to call time there.

They were the 1 seed and wound up losing that game to be eliminated. It was one of those games that I think he could feel they were in trouble from the start.