How long do you have to control the ball?

DaveASA/FED · #1 (**permalink**) Mon Jul 18, 2005, 03:50pm

Ok, 1st I know there is no set time limit but here is the play. Runner heading to home, throw from short stop trying to save a run runner slides hard into catcher (who had the ball no OBS) catcher makes tag PU calls out, catcher is injured by the slide and is hitting the top of her mitt making a "T" symbol and verbally requesting time. PU does not grant time as BR, has just rounded 1st and is heading for 2nd. F2 continues to make "T" symbol as team mates are around her knowing she is hurt. Ball falls out of the mitt, PU then calls the runner safe as the ball is dropped. To give you an idea of the time involved the tag was made as the runner got to 1st and the ball came free when the runner was about 2-3 steps from 2nd base.

Here are the questions,
1) Would you agree with PU that she dropped the ball, runner safe?
a) My thoughts are if he questioned control why not ask her to show you the ball prior to banging the out?
2) In my judgment she released the ball in the act of a following action, I see it as the same as dropping a caught fly ball while trying to throw it. She had control, got the out and then while trying to do the next action, in this case request time, she dropped the ball.

What say you all?? Not that it mattered at the time, but the mom called back to let the coach know the hand was broken.

Dakota · #2 (**permalink**) Mon Jul 18, 2005, 03:54pm

Quote:

Originally posted by DaveASA/FED
...In my judgment she released the ball in the act of a following action, I see it as the same as dropping a caught fly ball while trying to throw it. She had control, got the out and then while trying to do the next action, in this case request time, she dropped the ball..

Yup. OUT call stands.

IRISHMAFIA · #3 (**permalink**) Mon Jul 18, 2005, 04:51pm

Quote:

Originally posted by DaveASA/FED
Ok, 1st I know there is no set time limit but here is the play. Runner heading to home, throw from short stop trying to save a run runner slides hard into catcher (who had the ball no OBS) catcher makes tag PU calls out, catcher is injured by the slide and is hitting the top of her mitt making a "T" symbol and verbally requesting time. PU does not grant time as BR, has just rounded 1st and is heading for 2nd. F2 continues to make "T" symbol as team mates are around her knowing she is hurt. Ball falls out of the mitt, PU then calls the runner safe as the ball is dropped. To give you an idea of the time involved the tag was made as the runner got to 1st and the ball came free when the runner was about 2-3 steps from 2nd base.

Here are the questions,
1) Would you agree with PU that she dropped the ball, runner safe?

Not unless the PU believed the C didn't have control. Logically speaking, if the C was capable of making a hand gesture with both hands without dropping the ball, that is demonstration of control for me.

Steve M · #4 (**permalink**) Mon Jul 18, 2005, 06:29pm

I agree, that signal & request for time is a separate act. That probably shows control to me. It's an out - unless there was doubt about control all along.

Blu_IN · #5 (**permalink**) Mon Jul 18, 2005, 11:04pm

Wow, what did the coach do when the PU called the runner safe? The coach must have gone nuts!

whiskers_ump · #6 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 19, 2005, 06:35am

Does sound like control if she has time to make "T" signal during all this.

I too wondered how "unglued" the offended coach became.

officialtony · #7 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 19, 2005, 08:08am

This is an out at the very least. If I think she is signalling time due to injury, or if I think she got hurt on the play, we have Dead Ball and the runners advance no further. I'll take the heat for that call ( see related thread about coaches and injured players ). However, if it looked like nothing more than a train wreck and she was asking for time to stop advancing runners because she knew she couldn't get up in time to make a play, I am not granting time ( in your case, maybe that is what PU saw and thus, didn't want to grant time ).
Either way. in my opinion ( and remember, I wasn't there ), the out stands. The request for time was enough for me to see she had control.
Remember, I am not criticizing the judgment of your umpire. They were there and saw the play as it transpired and had the best view of what happened. They called it and that's the way it stood.

I am curious, what input, if any, did the BU have in this scenario?
Was there a discussion between BU and PU at all?
Sometimes that can help resolve a situation and save face at the same time - " BU had a better view of the ball and my call is the out stands. Catcher had control of the ball long enough. " Makes both umpires look efficient and willing to get the call right. Gotta sell it though!
Just my humble opinion.

DaveASA/FED · #8 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 19, 2005, 08:54am

Well the coaches had a discussion with the PU and he must have sold the call to them, not sure how. They did NOT like it but they walked away calmly. They had a history with this umpire he has worked a lot of tournies that they have hosted and I think they knew from past times he was not going to budge on his interp of the situation so they agreed to disagree quite respectfully.

BU was standing in "D" position seeing the whole play waiting for PU to ask for help, which the request never came. He did walk in as coaches attended to the girl and then coach 1 took her off the field and coach 2 started talking to PU, but since conversation was calm and level headed he stayed a few steps back waiting to be asked for input.

One more note from some of the replies- If he had wondered about control the whole play why didn't he ask her to show him the ball prior to the initial call of out? I know if I have a doubt I will call for the ball prior to banging an out! Once I call it whatever happens next is a following play IMO.

Now as a UIC (I know I am hijacking my own thread!!!) would you view this as a protestable call?? My thought is no, as the PU judged that she lost the ball as a result of the slide. Again my interp was it was a following play that made her lose it but if in his opinion it was a result of the play then there is no misinterp of a rule so no protest would you agree? (there wasn't an attempt to protest just wondering if they had)

Blu_IN · #9 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 19, 2005, 09:40am

Quote:

Originally posted by DaveASA/FED

Now as a UIC (I know I am hijacking my own thread!!!) would you view this as a protestable call?? My thought is no, as the PU judged that she lost the ball as a result of the slide. Again my interp was it was a following play that made her lose it but if in his opinion it was a result of the play then there is no misinterp of a rule so no protest would you agree? (there wasn't an attempt to protest just wondering if they had)

Absolutely. As long as the parameters of the protest involve the rule interpretation of what a catch is considered.

officialtony · #10 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 19, 2005, 10:09am

. . . . . I was under the impression that a protest could only be for an " application " of a rule - like two bases at time of throw as opposed to two bases at time of pitch, etc. I didn't think you could protest judgment calls - which this obviously was. A determination of control or not is, in fact, a judgment call and ( in my opinion ) not eligible for protest.
However, fell free to fire away at me.
I have thick skin ( I am an umpire ).

AtlUmpSteve · #11 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 19, 2005, 11:00am

Here's my $.02. I think there are a few possibilities here that may be unstated, or uncertain. Giving PU benefit of the doubt, it is quite possible he was looking for the ball throughout, did not (for whatever reason) choose use "show the ball" (I personally don't like it, it implies I'm not in position), and realized there never was possession previously, and the catcher was asking for time to mask that. At no point does the orinal post state that he clearly saw the ball in catcher's glove (although that may be an oversight in the post). If he made that explanation, it is not protestable.

A second possibility that occurs to me is that PU was thinking that possession must include voluntary release. If he made that explanation, it would certainly be protestable. If any explanation why it wasn't possession was other than the actual judgement, it would be protestable.

I am not familiar with a D position for a BU (while ASA, NCAA, and NFHS do not make those designations, I am somewhat familiar with what has been known as A, B, and C, even C1 and C2), so I can't know where he was or what he may have seen, but I wouldn't be particularly pleased with a partner who lurks like I (or any other umpire) needs to ask his input. Appreciate he came in to make sure a one-on-one, then get away unless asked.

bkbjones · #12 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 19, 2005, 01:26pm

Play 1 is tag on runner at home.

Play 2 is C asking for time while, for whatever the reason (yes I know her hand is broken), not making a throw to retire the runner at 2B.

Let's look at it from another perspective. Say we have a runner at 2B stealing 3B. She reaches 3B safely, under the tag, beats the throw, whatever. She is safe.

However, she overslides the bag...doesn't realize she has overslid...is on the ground asking for time...and is tagged out by 3B. She would still have reached 3B safely (and for those of you scoring at home, would receive a stolen base)...and be out on a subsequent play (5 unassisted for those scoring at home...and lucky you, you're doing a lot of scoring at home).

Play 1 is seperate from Play 2. IMHO runner should have been out.

mcrowder · #13 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 19, 2005, 02:19pm

Tony, it could only be protestable if someone actually told us here what PU said was his reason for the safe call, and his reason involved a misapplication of a rule.

While it certainly SOUNDS like a bad call, given only the information in the initial post, I'm convinced there was some reason for the extremely delayed call, and therefore we don't have all of the information.

Edited to add: In a play where I was at the plate this past season, on a passed ball, runner slid, but slid short (there was no OBS, as F2 had the ball) as F2 brought the ball to the plate. Runner never touched the bag. F2 never tagged her. Both of them looked at me for about a second and a half, as I made no call. F5 was yelling for the ball as R2 (originally on 1st) was coming to third. F2 pushed off of R1 (ball still in glove) as she was standing up to make the throw, and I bang R1 out.

NO ONE came to ask me about the call.

And I guarantee if anyone watching that play came here to post about it, they would have had no idea why the call was delayed so long, and would have made some assumptions that may be erroneous.

[Edited by mcrowder on Jul 19th, 2005 at 03:23 PM]

LIIRISHMAN · #14 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 20, 2005, 11:27am

The H/P runner out/safe is strictly a judgment call.No UIC in his right mind would honor the protest.Otherwise we'd be setting a precedent on a umpires judgent calls.IMHO the umpire was wrong to rule the runner safe.Once the catcher signalled for time she's demonstrated control.

IRISHMAFIA · #15 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 20, 2005, 11:58am

Quote:

Originally posted by LIIRISHMAN
The H/P runner out/safe is strictly a judgment call.No UIC in his right mind would honor the protest.Otherwise we'd be setting a precedent on a umpires judgent calls.IMHO the umpire was wrong to rule the runner safe.Once the catcher signalled for time she's demonstrated control.

Ask the umpire the right question in a certain order and get the right answers and it very easily becomes an interpretation issue which is protestable.