Did they un-ring the bell?

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

Only to prevent using intentional strategically to avoid adding to the count.

Which I honestly don't understand the issue. So what if a pitcher avoids delivering four pitches to intentionally walk a batter. Where is the strategy in that?

This is what really was going on. When a pitcher tried to intentionally walk a stud batter during the LLWS a couple of years ago, the opposing coach instructed his batter to take half-assed swings at the fourth and fifth pitches just to add two additional pitches to the pitcher's count to force him/her to reach his/her limit sooner. It was nothing more than a "FY" move on the coach's part for taking the bat out of his player's hands.

But it was also another blemish to LL's "clean" reputation in front of a watching audience (just like the sign stealing issue, which is another discussion topic in and of itself). So they came up with the no-pitch intentional walk rule to prevent that little form of gamesmanship. But they further felt that the pitcher should be burdened with four additional pitches to his/her count.

Why? Is it a disincentive to using intentional walks as a viable tactic to improve a team's chances of getting out of an inning? It must be, because it really has nothing to do with the fundamental purpose of the pitch count rule to prevent injuries due to overuse.

That's why I think any time a pitch is actually delivered by the pitcher to a batter, it should be counted against the pitcher's limit. The do-over shouldn't negate the fact that he/she pitched the ball. But that's just me.

[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.