The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Tue Apr 16, 2019, 03:27pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
How about a why for either the national UIC or the NUS clinician?
__________________
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.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Tue Apr 16, 2019, 03:28pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Slick View Post
BTW, no code of softball has a FPSR; that's baseball talk.
OK, I give up, what does it mean?
__________________
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.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Tue Apr 16, 2019, 05:36pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Fremont, NH
Posts: 1,352
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manny A View Post
Who would make that call then?

Since you said you were U3, I assume three-man with you being rotated, and U1 having responsibility for the play at first base. If that's the case, then I can't imagine who your "UIC and leadership" would say has the call at second base.
I'll guess that the suggestion was that it was a call that shouldn't have been made. I.E. The second out.

I'm thinking a clarification may be coming.
__________________
Ted
USA & NFHS Softball
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Tue Apr 16, 2019, 10:49pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Northeast Nebraska
Posts: 776
Quote:
Originally Posted by CecilOne View Post
OK, I give up, what does it mean?
Force play slide rule
__________________
Powder blue since 1998. Longtime forum lurker.
Umpiring Goals: Call the knee strike accurately (getting the low pitch since 2017)/NCAA D1 postseason/ISF-WBSC Certification/Nat'l Indicator Fraternity(completed)
"I'm gonna call it ASA for the foreseeable future. You all know what I mean."
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Tue Apr 16, 2019, 10:54pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Northeast Nebraska
Posts: 776
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manny A View Post
Who would make that call then?

Since you said you were U3, I assume three-man with you being rotated, and U1 having responsibility for the play at first base. If that's the case, then I can't imagine who your "UIC and leadership" would say has the call at second base.
It was my call the whole way -- that's not what was in question. U3 rotated with R1 only has responsibility for the force at 2B and anything that happens after that.

I can understand being told that it wasn't a good get on the INT. F4 had plenty of time to move and throw from somewhere else...that said, a fielder with the ball doesn't have to go anywhere on the field she doesn't want to. When she got slid into and taken out by R1, I thought it was an easy call. At that point, it's down to philosophy and judgment.

I won't even bring up the UIC/leadership advice I got a year later regarding not calling and enforcing an IP for a pitcher with rock rosin that wasn't detected until after a runner was on base....
__________________
Powder blue since 1998. Longtime forum lurker.
Umpiring Goals: Call the knee strike accurately (getting the low pitch since 2017)/NCAA D1 postseason/ISF-WBSC Certification/Nat'l Indicator Fraternity(completed)
"I'm gonna call it ASA for the foreseeable future. You all know what I mean."
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Tue Apr 16, 2019, 10:57pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Northeast Nebraska
Posts: 776
Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA View Post
You called INT because you considered the slide late, but would also endorse an INT call if the runner didn't slide and was hit by the throw?
Interference, by rule, is an act that hinders a fielder from making a play. Sliding into a fielder is an act. Simply existing after being put out is not an act, in and of itself. A few years ago, NCAA got itself on a slippery slope on this ruling.

A retired runner cannot simply go "poof".
__________________
Powder blue since 1998. Longtime forum lurker.
Umpiring Goals: Call the knee strike accurately (getting the low pitch since 2017)/NCAA D1 postseason/ISF-WBSC Certification/Nat'l Indicator Fraternity(completed)
"I'm gonna call it ASA for the foreseeable future. You all know what I mean."
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Wed Apr 17, 2019, 08:48am
Stirrer of the Pot
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Lowcountry, SC
Posts: 2,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by teebob21 View Post
Interference, by rule, is an act that hinders a fielder from making a play. Sliding into a fielder is an act. Simply existing after being put out is not an act, in and of itself. A few years ago, NCAA got itself on a slippery slope on this ruling.

A retired runner cannot simply go "poof".
NCAA doesn't expect the retired runner to go "poof". But they do expect the runner to make a reasonable attempt to slide when she gets to the base she is forced to reach, or to veer away after being retired. Going into the base standing up after obviously being retired on the front end of a DP shows intent to affect the fielder's throw to first base, at least according to the NCAA.
__________________
"Let's face it. Umpiring is not an easy or happy way to make a living. In the abuse they suffer, and the pay they get for it, you see an imbalance that can only be explained by their need to stay close to a game they can't resist." -- Bob Uecker
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old Wed Apr 17, 2019, 09:08am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 648
The "veering away" is an act. It's an act that cannot be anticipated by the fielder, and if it takes the runner into the path of a thrown ball, it should be called as INT.

Continuing upright (or legally sliding) directly toward 2b after being forced out should not be.

This I learned on this forum (from Irish ).

Please let me know if this conflicts with NCAA, 'cause I wanna get it right (in my 2nd year there).

Last edited by jmkupka; Wed Apr 17, 2019 at 09:11am.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old Wed Apr 17, 2019, 11:54am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: PA
Posts: 537
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmkupka View Post
The "veering away" is an act. It's an act that cannot be anticipated by the fielder, and if it takes the runner into the path of a thrown ball, it should be called as INT.

Continuing upright (or legally sliding) directly toward 2b after being forced out should not be.

This I learned on this forum (from Irish ).

Please let me know if this conflicts with NCAA, 'cause I wanna get it right (in my 2nd year there).
Sort of, and we have been down this road a lot.

There is a USA (Oct 2018 - on line) and NCAA (March 2019 - arbiter training tape) clarification of this play. I won't repeat them here because their words are very much their own.

My take: It is never "never" (Mike's side) or "always" (my former side). There are grey areas and you need to officiate and apply the definitions and appropriate rules. BTW - veering off can be a form of int and can also NOT be a form of int; staying in the base path CAN be a form of int and also can NOT be a form of int.
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 19, 2019, 04:41pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Slick View Post
staying in the base path CAN be a form of int and also can NOT be a form of int.
Staying on one's running route to a base should, in itself, never be an act of INT. Doing something different could be.

USA's interp from 2007 or 2009 NUIC clinic offered a sample play were simply being hit while running to 2B was not INT. Their counter-example was a just retired runner falling to the ground and getting back up and getting hit by the throw was as that was an act independent of simply attempting to advance.

It is the same philosophy for a batter interfering with a catcher's throw to 3B. If the batter stays where s/he belongs it is not INT if hit be a throw from the C. This had been, and still is, the philosophy for decades. If the batter is restricted to that certain spot, the catcher knows where s/he needs to make the throw. Why in the world would the same philosophy not apply on the base paths?

Have NCAA & NFHS deemed these players and coaches simply not smart enough to understand something so logical my dog can understand it?
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 19, 2019, 04:45pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
woof, woof
__________________
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.
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old Mon Apr 22, 2019, 01:35pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 1,640
Seeing eye dog?
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old Mon Apr 22, 2019, 02:30pm
Stirrer of the Pot
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Lowcountry, SC
Posts: 2,380
It isn't just NFHS and NCAA softball that expect the runner coming into second base on the front end of a DP to not go into the base standing up. This is simply part of the Force Play Slide Rule that exists in NFHS and NCAA baseball.

Yes, I know FSPR doesn't exist in softball. I'm just pointing out that NFHS and NCAA softball aren't the "rogue" organizations some make them out to be. There is consistency amongst at least these four sanctions in the expectation that a retired runner has no business going straight into a forced-to base standing up as the fielder attempts to turn the DP.

I don't know if this exists in MLB, but you never see a runner from first base going into second base standing up on the front end of a DP. They always either slide at the bag, slide well short of the bag, or veer away. Maybe they do this for self-preservation purposes more so than anything else.

Curious if other softball sanctions (e.g., USSSA, NSA, etc.) say anything about this.
__________________
"Let's face it. Umpiring is not an easy or happy way to make a living. In the abuse they suffer, and the pay they get for it, you see an imbalance that can only be explained by their need to stay close to a game they can't resist." -- Bob Uecker
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old Mon Apr 22, 2019, 07:29pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
And what happens when the runner in fear of being called for INT slides early and is not ruled out on the force?
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
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
nsa-fpsr timeout Softball 4 Wed Aug 01, 2012 12:15pm
Fpsr?? cookie Baseball 20 Tue Sep 21, 2010 09:06pm
Fpsr fmsc Baseball 9 Tue Oct 17, 2006 09:03am
FPSR BigUmp56 Baseball 2 Tue Nov 22, 2005 09:47am
FPSR? thumpferee Baseball 3 Mon Apr 18, 2005 05:46pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:45am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1