Believe It or Not

[CecilOne]

The term "forced" in this situation is not quite the same as in a "force out" situation. It merely defines which runners advance. With runners on 2nd and 3rd, no one would advance. With runners on 1st and 3rd, only the runner on 1st is "forced" to advance. Only with bases loaded is anyone going to score on an award of 1st.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by tcannizzo

mcrowder,

The UIC at the Nationals did not give the same response you just did. He said to the coach that he understood the concern, but that there was nothing he could do about it because the umpires had left the field. To me this implies that there was something more than what you are offering.

Otherwise, he woulda/shoulda said, hey, the ballgame was over either way. But he didn't, therefore leaving the wound open.

To begin, the UIC should have been talking to a single individual away from everyone else. Sometimes, UICs need to handle the situation however necessary to calm the coach. It doesn't mean that any official ruling would placate them.

As for my logic, Rule 10 allows the umpire to make a ruling on a rule that does not exist. If runners are allowed to advance without liability to be put out because of a force on an awarded base to BR. The force was removed. The defense could have made a triple play on this as R1 and R2 were just "walking" to their awarded bases.

Rule 10.1 is not available as each part of this situation is included in the rules.

I could not just stand by and allow the game to end that way. I would put the runners back on the base and invoke Rule 10. I would defer to the UIC if and only IF the offense lodged a protest to my ruling. Then if the UIC would have told me that I have misapplied Rule 10, I would have graciously made the correct call. But down the marrow in my bones, I believe the game would not have been over at that point.

It's not your job to determine "how" or for you to "allow" a game to end. Obviously, you didn't leave your coach's hat at home.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by tcannizzo

The UIC at the Nationals did not give the same response you just did. He said to the coach that he understood the concern, but that there was nothing he could do about it because the umpires had left the field. To me this implies that there was something more than what you are offering.

If it implies anything, it implies that the UIC didn't fully understand the situation. His implication that "nothing can be done because the umpires had left the field" may have simply been a cop out, or perhaps a valid answer to the fact that the coaches never actually protested until later... I'm speculating though.

As for my logic, Rule 10 allows the umpire to make a ruling on a rule that does not exist.

There's the problem though - rules do exist that completely cover this situation. Any runner forced to advance due to the BB does so without liability to be put out. period. Nothing else need be discussed.

If runners are allowed to advance without liability to be put out because of a force on an awarded base to BR. The force was removed.

No, these runners are allowed to advance without liability to be put out. It says nothing about these rights disappearing due to a subsequent out on BR that removes a force. In fact, a similar situation was discussed quite a while back - with R1 and R2 on 2nd and 1st, BR walked and rounded the bag toward 2nd and was tagged out after rounding (who knows why!). Defense then threw to third where R1 was lollygagging toward, and tagged - ruling was that R1 is still "entitled to advance without liability to be put out", despite the force being removed due to the disappearance of BR.

I could not just stand by and allow the game to end that way.

What way?

I would put the runners back on the base and invoke Rule 10.

Why not just use rules 1-9 when there's an applicable one, as in this case?

[scottk_61]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

Of course, that is "NECESSARY EVIL"

Ok, ok, I knew that one was coming.

[SC Ump]

Originally Posted by scottk_61

If you get a chance, go to a National and carry water, you learn and get to socialize.
Nothing is ever perfect at a National and remember, we umpires are a NECESSARY EVIL to the coaches and players as well as the TDs. Live with it.

I just got back in ASA after several years out. This past week-end, my new local ASA UIC talked to me about my interest in a fast-pitch national next year. I just can't get into it.

"Live with it" implies I don't have a choice. My choice is live without it. I choose not to deal with this lack of respect and appreciation. I'll use my trunk as a dressing room for a double header. You need me for six-plus games a day... I'm not using a milk crate chair and drinking out of a sprinkler hose. I'm sure there are others that consider it worth it.

[LLPA13UmpDan]

Im sorry...but that is weird there. I may not know ASA rules, but i know that doesnt sound right at with what happended. Game shouldnt have been over right there

[orangeump]

game is long over...I dont get why people dont understand this at all.....Batter runner is out, thats fine.

how many outs is that? ONE, correct? Ok, great. one out, run scores.

[Bandit]

Just had a chance to sorta "catch-up" on this thread. Gonna have to think and absorb some of the thoughts about the ruling. Will comment on that later. About the handling of officials and the actions of some UIC's when it comes to "Sunday" assignments. Pre determined umpire assignments unfortunetly happen. Is it disappointing. YES. May I ask who the UIC was at this particular tournament? I was recently at the 12 & Under A in Bloomington IN. The tournament was great. Weather HOT. Umpire accomidations FANTASTIC. Umpire Care. GREAT. Congragulations to Valarie and all her staff of the Bloomington Visitors Dept.!

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by LLPA13UmpDan

Im sorry...but that is weird there. I may not know ASA rules, but i know that doesnt sound right at with what happended. Game shouldnt have been over right there

Care to elaborate? Why wouldn't the run score, even if BR was called out for abandonment for the FIRST out of the inning?

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by tcannizzo

2. Sat 9PM game. Loser gets 5th place. Winner guaranteed 4th and still in it.
Game tied 1-1 after 7.
8th - neither team executes
9th - neither team executes
Top 10th - Vis gets 3
Bot 10th - Home gets 3
Top 11 - Vis does not execute
Bot 11 - Home has bases loaded with no out. 3-2 count on B4. Next pitch is Ball 4. BR goes into dugout to put bat away and then comes back out to the celebration at the plate. Defense is appealing BR did not touch 1B (which she never did). All 3 Umps run off field and get into the golf cart to get back to the house. Defense is pleading with the umps not to leave. 90 seconds later, they get the UIC who said he understood their position, but since the umps were already gone, there was nothing he could do about it. One of the umps was in the 2006 WCWS.

I have avoided this thread, because it seemed to me the basic intent was to rant about unqualified umpires, poor tournament management, and so-called pc umpire assignments. I'm actually surprised this has generated so much response, since it seemed to me to be one of those things that should not be dignified with a response.

Sorry, tcannizzo, everything you said may be objectively true, still, there is something unseemly about posting such complaints here, especially those that directly accuse the UIC of favortism. I recall a couple of years ago, an experienced member of the ASA NIF posted considerably milder criticism of a national held in the Atlanta area and had her ASA credentials withdrawn over it.

As I said, it seems to me you are accusing the tournament UIC of favortism and unethical behavior. What would you do with a coach who accused you of such publicly during a game?

As to the play I quoted above, it is not such a mystery and surely does not require Rule 10 to resolve. BR is out for entering the dugout during a live ball. One out. Any other runner who touched her next base cannot be appealed for an out. Any runner who touched home scores, unless at least two other runners did not touch and were properly appealed. Since the umpires left so quickly, no appeal was possible. Since the umpires had left the field, no protest was possible. But, getting into the appeal/protest issue can be completely avoided so long as R1 touched home and either R2 or R3 touched their next base. Run scored, game was over, nothing to appeal or protest that would make any difference.

[greymule]

as for the diversity issue

Let's come out and say it. Diversity of what exactly?

[MNBlue]

Originally Posted by Dakota

As to the play I quoted above, it is not such a mystery and surely does not require Rule 10 to resolve. BR is out for entering the dugout during a live ball. One out. Any other runner who touched her next base cannot be appealed for an out. Any runner who touched home scores, unless at least two other runners did not touch and were properly appealed. Since the umpires left so quickly, no appeal was possible. Since the umpires had left the field, no protest was possible. But, getting into the appeal/protest issue can be completely avoided so long as R1 touched home and either R2 or R3 touched their next base. Run scored, game was over, nothing to appeal or protest that would make any difference.

I completely agree.

BTW, has anyone notice that the game started at 9:00pm and went 11 innings? Do any of you wonder why the umpires left the field?

I'm hoping they knew they had a winner and that the BR not touching first didn't matter, as opposed to just wanting to get the 'H' out of there.

[tcannizzo]

Originally Posted by Dakota

I have avoided this thread, because it seemed to me the basic intent was to rant about unqualified umpires, poor tournament management, and so-called pc umpire assignments. I'm actually surprised this has generated so much response, since it seemed to me to be one of those things that should not be dignified with a response.

Tom, you are correct. If everyone agrees, I will delete the OP with my apologies. Long week, still not totally recovered.

As to the play, I would agree that Rule 10 is not necessary, but the blues should have answered the defense and just say that it didn't matter whether BR touched 1B or not, the game was still over, unless it was the 3rd out, which in this case it was not.

Good thread, I have learned some very important lessons from it. Hopefully others have too.

Peace.

[mcrowder]

Well, they should have stayed, and honored the appeal at first (or more accurately, called BR out for abandonment without needing an appeal), and THEN left. Who knows what ELSE could have gone wrong - and the game wasn't over until the baserunners finished their duties, not just R1 on third.

[LLPA13UmpDan]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

Care to elaborate? Why wouldn't the run score, even if BR was called out for abandonment for the FIRST out of the inning?

ok, lets just forget about it, and get a ruling from HQ