ASA Rules - No slide at the plate.. is ball dead ?

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by chicago11

I don't believe you can have interference and obstuction on the same collision. It is one or the other. You can have obstruction with USC on the runner, but in that case you would have the runner safe and then ejected.

If a fielder is obstructing and then the runner illegally interferes without UC (malicious or flagrant or ...), what would you call?

btw, 8-7-Q

[Mountaineer]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

If a fielder is obstructing and then the runner illegally interferes without UC (malicious or flagrant or ...), what would you call?

btw, 8-7-Q

In Fed or NCAA, I do not see how it could be anything other than obstruction. In HS it's not obstruction until the runner changes their direction, or speed (can't quote it and don't have my trusty book handy). Maybe I'm not visualizing what you are saying - but unless there's malicious contact I don't see how an offensive player can interfere with an obstructing fielder.

[wadeintothem]

I'll bite a little on the tie base goes to the runner stuff...

1) I think in reality there are few instances where its exactly a tie.. but because we are humans, not slow mo replay.. depending on what side you are on.. offense, defense, or an umpire.. it will be seen differently. So if you um.. "see" the out and sell it its more acceptable than if you sit and call safe all day for "tie base" because you cant tell it was an out.

In some situations I would put "tie base goes to the runner" in the same category at an acceptable strike zone vs legal strike zone.

At higher levels (not nose to toes 10U).. legally you can call a pitch where half the ball runs acrossed the arm pits .. but your credibility will suffer, both sides will know you are screwing them, and you will really take a deserved beating from the fans players and coaches.. and you could walk around wearing the strike zone rule pinned to your shirt and it wouldnt mean anything.

Same thing with tie base ..

People (maybe its MLB conditioning) on a clean play expect the out. Even the team favored this time will see you "screwed" the other team and when you screw them, your credibility has suffered. Everyone saw you screw the team out of a great play and they will be waiting for you to screw their team.

Example, a clean double play where you may think its a "tie"..well IMO, its not, its a sell out.

I would call it "in the trenches survivability" .. mens FP, higher level ball .. good clean plays - the out is expected.. perhaps a benefit of doubt to defense on good plays on the bases. I would not suggest an umpire ever using the words "tie base goes to the runner" (for sure dont call it a myth either!) in their on the field vocabulary.

Thats just my .02 and I already know many disagree.

If the ball dont beat the runner, its safe.. thats known. But I think theres a little more to effectively calling the game from the field when you have quick plays and fast good players who know what they are doing.. what is acceptable and what is expected.. just like with a strike zone.

[Fozzie]

I don't disagree with you here. If I have a nice clean play I'm ringing up the out.

With that being said. I have never seen a tie.
And I am sure not telling the players I saw a tie.

The phrase we use around here is 'tie goes to the umpire'

Fozzie

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Fozzie

I don't disagree with you here. If I have a nice clean play I'm ringing up the out.

I think someone needs to define a "clean play".

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I think someone needs to define a "clean play".

How about: fielder has ball and touches the base before the runner arrives.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

How about: fielder has ball and touches the base before the runner arrives.

That would be obvious without need of description. However, a "clean play" is usually referred to when the defender's handle the ball with no bobbles, drop, slips or error (generically, not as scoring a play).

Just because the defense does their job without mistakes does not mean the defense gets the call.

Thus the reason I asked for a definition.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

That would be obvious without need of description. However, a "clean play" is usually referred to when the defender's handle the ball with no bobbles, drop, slips or error (generically, not as scoring a play).

Just because the defense does their job with mistakes does not mean the defense gets the call.

Thus the reason I asked for a definition.

There is no smiley for facetious, so I used the "razz". Did you really think that was a serious answer?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

There is no smiley for facetious, so I used the "razz". Did you really think that was a serious answer?

No, be seeing that as the only response, I was just trying to set the tone of the cause for my previous request.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

That would be obvious without need of description. However, a "clean play" is usually referred to when the defender's handle the ball with no bobbles, drop, slips or error (generically, not as scoring a play).

Just because the defense does their job without mistakes does not mean the defense gets the call.

Thus the reason I asked for a definition.

Mike, I'm confused by your clarification here. Did you mean what I've inserted?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Mike, I'm confused by your clarification here. Did you mean what I've inserted?

Ooh, thanks. Yep, post edited.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Mike, I'm confused by your clarification here. Did you mean what I've inserted?

I just assumed that and you should have too.