Did they un-ring the bell?

[CecilOne]

The strategy is that the pitcher could then have more pitches for the next, presumably easier batter. We often see an IW to a great batter when a weak batter follows, in leagues where pitch count does not matter.

This does not mean that I agree or disagree with the rule.

[CecilOne]

Back to the original point. The ball was called foul by mistake. We all consider that a mistake that stands.
Even though review showed it was fair, would you change the foul call? Would you ignore the pitch as they did?

That batter eventually singled, could have ended up scoring and did affect the batting order that inning and the next.

Anyone who saw the play, did you think the BR slowed down on the call?

BTW, reviews are for force plays, tag plays, bases missed, bases left early; apparently not fair/foul (by TV coverage).

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

BTW, reviews are for force plays, tag plays, bases missed, bases left early; apparently not fair/foul (by TV coverage).

I watched a couple of innings of the Hawaii / Virginia game last night. Hawaii was up in the top of the sixth with runners on base. Batter hit a sharp bouncer over the third base bag and into the left field corner, scoring a couple.

Virginia manager came out to the PU to question the fair call. PU checked with the replay reviewer, then came out to home plate and pointed fair.

So apparently the LL replay rules for their post-season games do allow for review of fair/foul.

Frankly, LL's replay rules are a joke and are making these games unwatchable, in my opinion. Apparently there is no limit to the number of times a manager can request a review. I would say that almost 100% of banger plays and close fair/foul calls have gone through reviews.

It's gotten to the point where I question LL's faith in the quality of the umpires who work their regionals and world series. They are so paranoid that an umpire's call could result in a player or team being wronged that they're bending over backward to prevent it.

Mark my words: LL will implement the computerized strike zone that is being used in the Independent Baseball Leagues this summer. It is the one thing that LL still has to depend upon the umpire's judgment, and I'm sure they're cringing at some of the pitches that are being called strikes.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by Manny A

I watched a couple of innings of the Hawaii / Virginia game last night. Hawaii was up in the top of the sixth with runners on base. Batter hit a sharp bouncer over the third base bag and into the left field corner, scoring a couple.

Virginia manager came out to the PU to question the fair call. PU checked with the replay reviewer, then came out to home plate and pointed fair.

So apparently the LL replay rules for their post-season games do allow for review of fair/foul.

Frankly, LL's replay rules are a joke and are making these games unwatchable, in my opinion. Apparently there is no limit to the number of times a manager can request a review. I would say that almost 100% of banger plays and close fair/foul calls have gone through reviews.

It's gotten to the point where I question LL's faith in the quality of the umpires who work their regionals and world series. They are so paranoid that an umpire's call could result in a player or team being wronged that they're bending over backward to prevent it.

Mark my words: LL will implement the computerized strike zone that is being used in the Independent Baseball Leagues this summer. It is the one thing that LL still has to depend upon the umpire's judgment, and I'm sure they're cringing at some of the pitches that are being called strikes.

OP ball was called foul. Hawai'i (yes editor, the apostrophe is correct) game the ball was called fair and played as if it was fair so there was nothing to fix.

Manager can challenge until he gets two "fails".

The payers are 12, not pros. The umpires are volunteers, not pros. Accept that neither will be perfect and that the "get it right" approach is now in all sports - so replay will continue.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

The umpires are volunteers, not pros.

All due respect, I get tired of that age-old excuse. They may not get paid to work LL games, but they're far from being the typical "volunteer" that you see on a Saturday morning in March at some local LL park. These umpires are have worked tens if not hundreds of games in any given season for quite some time. Many umpires also work paid gigs doing travel, high school, and even college games. They've attended plenty of camps and clinics. They know what they're doing out there. They don't need replay help for every single call.

I don't do LL anymore, and haven't in over ten years. So I don't bother knowing the replay rules for the post-season. Perhaps you are right that managers only get two "fails". But I've seen where the umpires will get together after a call and then consult the booth. For all I know, they may even get called to the booth when the replay official feels a wrong needs to be made right. Who knows. But what I do know is that they allow replays for calls that have no business being reviewed, and then they come up with such bogus decisions as a "do-over" to ensure nobody got hurt by the call.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by Manny A

All due respect, I get tired of that age-old excuse. They may not get paid to work LL games, but they're far from being the typical "volunteer" that you see on a Saturday morning in March at some local LL park.

They are selected as much or more for time in service to LL vs skill. It's a reward for meritorious service.

[CecilOne]

Back to the original point. The ball was called foul by mistake. We all consider that a mistake that stands.

Even though review showed it was fair, would you change the foul call?

Would you ignore the pitch as they did?

That batter eventually singled, could have ended up scoring and did affect the batting order that inning and the next.

Anyone who saw the play, did you think the BR slowed down on the call?

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

Back to the original point. The ball was called foul by mistake. We all consider that a mistake that stands.

Even though review showed it was fair, would you change the foul call?

No!

Would you ignore the pitch as they did?

No!

That batter eventually singled, could have ended up scoring and did affect the batting order that inning and the next.

Anyone who saw the play, did you think the BR slowed down on the call?

No!

Now, my first two answers are based upon the way every other organization would handle this. Once the ball is ruled Foul, tough noogies that it could be shown that it was fair. The Foul call stands, and let's play. Sh!t happens.

You're last question is only relevant if you're considering to change the original call to Fair, and then want to "play God" in determining what should the final ruling be. I think the BR was toast on the play if he kept going at a dead sprint. It appears he might've slowed up a little bit, probably from seeing U1 mirror the foul call (which is a No-No to begin with; umpires should not be coaching base runners, that's what base coaches are for), but in my judgment it didn't change what I think the outcome of the play would be.

So if I was the replay official here and had people above me give me the authority to change a Foul call to Fair, I would've ruled the BR out, and let's play. Sh!t happens.

[teebob21]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

Back to the original point. The ball was called foul by mistake. We all consider that a mistake that stands.

Even though review showed it was fair, would you change the foul call?

Would you ignore the pitch as they did?

That batter eventually singled, could have ended up scoring and did affect the batting order that inning and the next.

Anyone who saw the play, did you think the BR slowed down on the call?

I'm late on getting back to this, but I appreciate the video link for context.

With the benefit of slo-mo, I'm still wondering if it hit the bat a second time while in the batter's hands while his feet were still in the box. I don't think it did, based on the multiple angles, but our PU doesn't have that luxury.

It was a weird bunt. PU was blocked on seeing the ball (probably not) hit the bat a second time, or less likely, hit the batter as he exited the box. I think the foul call on the field was one of these two reasons, and rightfully so. We don't always see the ball hit the batter....we learn to react to the path of the ball (which was weird) and the reactions of the batter/fielders.

THAT SAID

Even if review shows this fair, under no softball code that I work can we un-ring the bell and make it fair from a foul call. If PU judged it hit the batter or the bat while in the box, we got a dead ball/foul ball, and judgment in this case isn't up for review.

Would I ignore the pitch? No -- he threw it. Ignoring this in the pitch count is almost as stupid as charging F1 with 4 thrown pitches on an IBB. Pitch counts are there to protect arms. For whatever reason...

Yes, I think the batter slowed down perceptibly on the play, but I can't say if that was due to the foul call from home, the mirrored dead-ball signal from U1 which we don't do in softball, or because he knew he was out by ten feet.

I don't hate the do-over rule, and for LL, that's probably the best ruling for the kids. Elsewhere, we gotta eat this foul ball. The adults kicked it...so don't penalize anyone in LL....just pretend it never happened and finish the at-bat. Alternatively, invoke Rule 10/12/15...whichever is the one in the back of the book that says we can fix umpire jeopardy and make it right by the alphabet that's on your shirt or hat that day. (Which IMO would be an out at first base)

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by teebob21

It was a weird bunt. PU was blocked on seeing the ball (probably not) hit the bat a second time, or less likely, hit the batter as he exited the box. I think the foul call on the field was one of these two reasons, and rightfully so.

My opinion, based on the fact that the PU waited to signal anything until the catcher fielded the ball, was that the PU goofed and thought the area between the two boxes in front of home plate was foul territory. He yelled "FOUL, FOUL!" a couple of times. The proper mechanic if he felt the ball hit the bat a second time or the batter as he existed the box is to call "TIME!" (or "DEAD BALL!" in softball).

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by Manny A

My opinion, based on the fact that the PU waited to signal anything until the catcher fielded the ball, was that the PU goofed and thought the area between the two boxes in front of home plate was foul territory. He yelled "FOUL, FOUL!" a couple of times. The proper mechanic if he felt the ball hit the bat a second time or the batter as he existed the box is to call "TIME!" (or "DEAD BALL!" in softball).

I don't think we can judge bases on proper mechanics, even if we were experts on LL. The timing you describe is very relevant.

Besides, while watching the game, I reran, frame by frame etc., and there was no contact with bat or BR. Anyway, the question is not about the call being wrong, not about mechanics; just about the subsequent process and decision.

[Tru_in_Blu]

I'm another that does not work LL sanction.

I know very little about their rules, but simply based on this string, some of their thinking seems logically fallacious.

To not charge the pitcher a pitch count on the "do over" is counter to the reason the pitch count is in place in the first place, isn't it? If the batter became injured on that play, having a "do over" doesn't make him any less injured.

Charging 4 pitches on an IBB is simply rife for strategic "non sportsmanlike actions". Just have him take the Don Drysdale approach: "Don Drysdale would consider an intentional walk a waste of three pitches. If he wants to put you on base, he can hit you with one pitch." - Mike Shannon

I actually don't even know if runners can lead in LL. But maybe pitch counts should apply to throws to a base in an attempted pickoff. And while we're at it, warm up pitches should count, too.