![]() |
|
|
|||
Thoughts on this SNAFU....
I was contacted by a local HS umpire yesterday with the following situation:
R1 on third, 2 outs, x-2 count on the batter. Pitch is strike three, ball gets past the catcher (U3K) Runner on third attempts to score, batter-runner does not move from the batter's box PU calls DEAD BALL and declares batter out on strike three, no run scores. (brain fart) Offensive coach comes out to question the call The umpire that contacted me wanted to know what I would do to "fix" this screwup. I would like to hear your opinions before I tell you what I recommended and what the two umpires on the field actually did.
__________________
It's what you learn after you think you know it all that's important! |
|
|||
I quit. My brain already exploded.
If you award the out with thought batter would not have beat throw to first, runner can't score and the OC is pissed. If you say batter runner would have reached first, then do you allow runner to score? If so then D.C. Is pissed. Can we go back to playground rules and just yell "Do Over"? |
|
|||
First, it does not matter if either coach is upset, as long as we get it correct; or at least think we did.
Obviously, there is no real answer, AND we can't assume anything about actions of the catcher, fielder, BR or R1. Looking for an escape, is BR now out for not reaching 1st while ball was alive? I might decide that as I could not have called "dead ball" in that situation that it does not apply; whatever happens applies, which means the BR would eventually reach 1st or be putout. Or, on the spur of the moment, "SORRY COACHES", my call stands. Bad idea, but probably a bell I can't unring. Maybe more guessing later, but looking forward to responses.
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT. It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be. |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Good one.
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT. It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be. |
|
|||
Not a "fix" as requested by Andy, but the only answer supported by the rules. And I suspect this was Andy's answer, but betting the crew did something different to appease and compromise.
__________________
Steve ASA/ISF/NCAA/NFHS/PGF |
|
|||
Quote:
However, my advice to them was a little bit different. I advised them to eat the call, take the heat from the coaches, and move on to the next inning. By inadvertently calling time, you have placed both teams at a disadvantage by not allowing the offense the opportunity to score and the defense by not allowing them the opportunity to get an out. Placing the batter runner on first and the other runner back at third base is an advantage to the offense while taking away the opportunity for the defense to make a play. Yeah, it's a cluster but I think in this case it's something that we just have to live with.
__________________
It's what you learn after you think you know it all that's important! |
|
|||
But it was not an inadvertent act, but a complete misinterpretation of the rule which is protestable.
The run cannot score without the BR being awarded 1st. If it had been protested, I would probably do exactly what youngump & Steve suggested. And I do not believe that such a ruling causes either team a disadvantage that wasn't earned. The defense's failure created the situation and the BRs lack of action doesn't help an offensive argument. However, I would like to know the timing between the strike and the DB call by the umpire. Was the PUs call delayed or immediate? Then again, it certainly wouldn't break my heart (or that of any umpire's, I assume) if the U3K rule was eliminated from the rule book all together
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball. |
|
|||
In post #3, I said:
I might decide that as I could not have called "dead ball" in that situation that it does not apply; whatever happens applies, which means the BR would eventually reach 1st or be putout. Somewhat like saying inadvertent, except not awarding anything. Please find fault with this.
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT. It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be. |
|
|||
Quote:
It seems to me there are cases, trying to remember one, where we expect the teams to know the rule and situation even when we mess up. Does that apply to the above?
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT. It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be. |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Steve ASA/ISF/NCAA/NFHS/PGF |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Lineup Card SNAFU | Manny A | Softball | 15 | Sun Sep 15, 2013 10:53pm |
Nfhs cr snafu | JEL | Softball | 10 | Tue Sep 06, 2011 03:38pm |
Scheduling snafu | buckrog64 | Basketball | 5 | Thu Nov 30, 2006 03:05pm |
Timing snafu | BloggingRefGuy | Basketball | 5 | Sun Oct 22, 2006 07:11pm |
Scorekeeping snafu | theboys | Basketball | 15 | Tue Mar 04, 2003 10:00pm |