When I'm Wrong, I'm wrong: Interference is better without intent

[IRISHMAFIA]

Well, that still doesn't do it for me.

As we saw in a clip from eteamz (below) too many different possible interpretations. In the clip, the batter, in no way, shape or form committed an act of interference. Yes, she took a step when regaining her balance, but with the rewording of the rule, you have umpires making calls like we see on the clip.

In the past, the catcher knew exactly where the batter could or could not go. Because of rulings like this, the catcher will now throw through the box and the batter beware. BTW, you don't think coaches are going to take advantage of this, do you?

I'll repeat what I have said before, and what I was told by multiple members of the NUS. The calls should not be different, it's just a better worded rule. Any umpire who couldn't read a player's intent in such a play before, isn't going to be any better an umpire now.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qsfj68JjJuY&mode=related&search=

[wadeintothem]

I missed that thread and video on ezteamz.

Did that umpire Call INT?????

You know mike, I'm trying to make the best of this rule change, and it IS a rule change, I dont care what they say - but even with this change, its not INT.

The rule used to mean "on purpose" and now it means "causes" - so thats a change and its taught as a change but soft shoed to "not a change"... but it IS.

But even with this change, I dont see how anyone can reasonably call INT on that video.

We'll see how the season goes - TB hasnt really started up. I've worked one "A" tourney (A used VERY loosely) and some rec...

[tribefan1952]

Hmmm... I'm not convinced about this one. What's to keep the catcher from deliberately throwing the ball at the RH batter who's standing in the box when there's a steal at 3rd base? Especially if you're sure to get the interference call... After all, it's a heck of a lot easier to hit a batter standing 4 feet away than to make a good throw and a good tag on the runner. This seems to give an unfair advantage to the defense.

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by tribefan1952

Hmmm... I'm not convinced about this one. What's to keep the catcher from deliberately throwing the ball at the RH batter who's standing in the box when there's a steal at 3rd base? Especially if you're sure to get the interference call... After all, it's a heck of a lot easier to hit a batter standing 4 feet away than to make a good throw and a good tag on the runner. This seems to give an unfair advantage to the defense.

Actually, that is an outstanding issue with the ASA.. people misinterpreting it.

The ASA will need to iron that out so that Umpires/coaches that think like what you stated and that idiotic call in the video dont happen.

I've argued in the past the ASA must cater to the lowest common denominator and that is why we have certain things like insisting on the slot and various other things. This change may represent a step outside that "lowest common denominator" thinking and it could be a problem in that respect.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

I've argued in the past the ASA must cater to the lowest common denominator and that is why we have certain things like insisting on the slot and various other things. This change may represent a step outside that "lowest common denominator" thinking and it could be a problem in that respect.

That has always been an issue. Yes, there may be better mechanics available, for those at the higher levels, but that doesn't mean all 38K registered umpires can/will accept and execute them properly.

Same with the rules. If we started tweaking every rule for every division, classification and level of play and umpiring, the rule book would make War and Peace look like a dime store novel.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by tribefan1952

Hmmm... I'm not convinced about this one. What's to keep the catcher from deliberately throwing the ball at the RH batter who's standing in the box when there's a steal at 3rd base? Especially if you're sure to get the interference call... After all, it's a heck of a lot easier to hit a batter standing 4 feet away than to make a good throw and a good tag on the runner. This seems to give an unfair advantage to the defense.

And, how or why would she be sure to get the interference call under any set of rules? Certainly not under the new ASA rule, if you understood it.

The RH batter standing in the box when there's a steal of 3rd has to ACTIVELY hinder to be subject to an interference call. So, 1) she shouldn't get the call you think, and 2) she may get a call for USC and be ejected if the PU pays attention, and realizes she was deliberately throwing the ball at the batter. And, probably the coach goes, too, when he comes out attempting to protect the catcher that he foolishly instructed to do the wrong thing.

There is no advantage gained by either offense or defense in the new wording. The advantage is to the UMPIRE, who no longer needs to try to justify to himself or a coach how he knew the intent of a player. But, you need to read and understand what ACTIVELY hindering means, and what actions that a player does aren't ever going to be interference.

[wadeintothem]

Another thing in the "when I'm wrong, I'm wrong" category - different game, this one 12U Rec - coach decides he wants to try a new girl at catcher and she tells me she never caught before.

So here comes a pitch - the girl doesnt move, shes frozen. The ball wacks me. So I take another one and I tell her "girl you need to move that mitt and catch the ball." I took a few more hits, I tell her to catch the ball.. she would catch the ones that came straight to her.. but essentially, she was a statue for anything inside or high. I took a few off my mask, shoulder, leg. Finally I took one to my hip/groin region and I'm ticked off. I tell the coach that "If I take another shot and she doesnt even attempt to catch it shes gone. I'm not a backstop". Well now she's crying and upset, but trying to catch it.

I'm gun shy and pretty much watching the ball for where I need to move and not strike/ball and just calling everything not swung at a ball. This has the effect of a long inning. I start realizing I goofed up, now she is moving though, but still can't catch. I took a another hard foul off my mask other shots. I tell the coach that I shouldnt have said that and if he wants to use her as a catcher I will just call the game for his side from behind the pitcher. So he changes her out.

Can't coaches try out a new catcher during .. oh I dont know, say - practice!

But I still goofed up saying that..

[hotmatt]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

Another thing in the "when I'm wrong, I'm wrong" category - different game, this one 12U Rec - coach decides he wants to try a new girl at catcher and she tells me she never caught before.

So here comes a pitch - the girl doesn't move, shes frozen. The ball wacks me. So I take another one and I tell her "girl you need to move that mitt and catch the ball." I took a few more hits, I tell her to catch the ball.. she would catch the ones that came straight to her.. but essentially, she was a statue for anything inside or high. I took a few off my mask, shoulder, leg. Finally I took one to my hip/groin region and I'm ticked off. I tell the coach that "If I take another shot and she doesn't even attempt to catch it shes gone. I'm not a backstop". Well now she's crying and upset, but trying to catch it.

I'm gun shy and pretty much watching the ball for where I need to move and not strike/ball and just calling everything not swung at a ball. This has the effect of a long inning. I start realizing I goofed up, now she is moving though, but still can't catch. I took a another hard foul off my mask other shots. I tell the coach that I shouldn't have said that and if he wants to use her as a catcher I will just call the game for his side from behind the pitcher. So he changes her out.

Can't coaches try out a new catcher during .. oh I dint know, say - practice!

But I still goofed up saying that..

I have a similar one. A few years ago I was working a fall league, 16u. One team was a traditionally strong program all from the same school. After two innings of being hit by nearly every pitch that wasn't a strike, I told the coach his catcher was killing me. He's reply, "Sorry Blue that's my SS, my catcher is at home with the flu." I shook my head and walked away.

[SWFLguy]

Ah--more memories. Back when I still had an outside protector (yes--a "raft") with my gear-- I was getting hit all over too. I called for time out--went to my car and brought out the venerable piece of gear. All
the balls bounced off that thing and no more bruises, etc.
I sometimes wish we could still use them.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

Another thing in the "when I'm wrong, I'm wrong" category - different game, this one 12U Rec - coach decides he wants to try a new girl at catcher and she tells me she never caught before.

So here comes a pitch - the girl doesnt move, shes frozen. The ball wacks me. So I take another one and I tell her "girl you need to move that mitt and catch the ball." I took a few more hits, I tell her to catch the ball.. she would catch the ones that came straight to her.. but essentially, she was a statue for anything inside or high. I took a few off my mask, shoulder, leg. Finally I took one to my hip/groin region and I'm ticked off. I tell the coach that "If I take another shot and she doesnt even attempt to catch it shes gone. I'm not a backstop". Well now she's crying and upset, but trying to catch it.

I'm gun shy and pretty much watching the ball for where I need to move and not strike/ball and just calling everything not swung at a ball. This has the effect of a long inning. I start realizing I goofed up, now she is moving though, but still can't catch. I took a another hard foul off my mask other shots. I tell the coach that I shouldnt have said that and if he wants to use her as a catcher I will just call the game for his side from behind the pitcher. So he changes her out.

Can't coaches try out a new catcher during .. oh I dont know, say - practice!

But I still goofed up saying that..

I do not care if she is only 12 years old. After the second time I got hit becuase she would not attempt to catch any pitch unless it was thrown directly where she was holder her cather's mitt, would be the last time I caught hit by a pitch with were in the cather's box. I would have called timeout and had a quiet private conversation with the catcher's coach and my partner. I would have told the coach that if the catcher did not start doing her job that I would eject him from the game. Sending a player, who has never played the position including in practice, to play the catcher's position just proves what an idiot the coach is.

No good coach would put his player in this position. As you said, we are not backstops.

MTD, Sr.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I do not care if she is only 12 years old. After the second time I got hit becuase she would not attempt to catch any pitch unless it was thrown directly where she was holder her cather's mitt, would be the last time I caught hit by a pitch with were in the cather's box. I would have called timeout and had a quiet private conversation with the catcher's coach and my partner. I would have told the coach that if the catcher did not start doing her job that I would eject him from the game. Sending a player, who has never played the position including in practice, to play the catcher's position just proves what an idiot the coach is.

No good coach would put his player in this position. As you said, we are not backstops.

MTD, Sr.

So how many would you eject if the team simply had no one available who had ever caught before (perhaps their only catcher had gotten hurt, sick, was at a soccer game, etc ... or perhaps even ejected earlier in the game). There's a difference between a player who is able to field the position not doing their job and letting us get hit, and a player who is simply unable to do the job.

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I do not care if she is only 12 years old. After the second time I got hit becuase she would not attempt to catch any pitch unless it was thrown directly where she was holder her cather's mitt, would be the last time I caught hit by a pitch with were in the cather's box. I would have called timeout and had a quiet private conversation with the catcher's coach and my partner. I would have told the coach that if the catcher did not start doing her job that I would eject him from the game. Sending a player, who has never played the position including in practice, to play the catcher's position just proves what an idiot the coach is.

No good coach would put his player in this position. As you said, we are not backstops.

MTD, Sr.

And you would justify this action how, exactly, by rule?

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I do not care if she is only 12 years old. After the second time I got hit becuase she would not attempt to catch any pitch unless it was thrown directly where she was holder her cather's mitt, would be the last time I caught hit by a pitch with were in the cather's box. I would have called timeout and had a quiet private conversation with the catcher's coach and my partner. I would have told the coach that if the catcher did not start doing her job that I would eject him from the game. Sending a player, who has never played the position including in practice, to play the catcher's position just proves what an idiot the coach is.

No good coach would put his player in this position. As you said, we are not backstops.

MTD, Sr.

Its Rec League and thats a little harsh for how I personally TRY to approach this league. I've been a coach, umpire, UIC and involved a long time. I dont really have a lot of the walls up that I have at a tourney. I'll talk with coaches, explain rules, and do various things on a level I would never do at a tournament with a travel team.

That said, I did get ticked off at the girl

I get hit plenty even with the "real" catchers on the team.

[bkbjones]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I do not care if she is only 12 years old. After the second time I got hit becuase she would not attempt to catch any pitch unless it was thrown directly where she was holder her cather's mitt, would be the last time I caught hit by a pitch with were in the cather's box. I would have called timeout and had a quiet private conversation with the catcher's coach and my partner. I would have told the coach that if the catcher did not start doing her job that I would eject him from the game. Sending a player, who has never played the position including in practice, to play the catcher's position just proves what an idiot the coach is.

No good coach would put his player in this position. As you said, we are not backstops.

MTD, Sr.

And that mindset, my friends, is why I was able to walk away from a pretty good avocation/career in little ball many years ago.

I don't like them using ME for practice, but I ain't jackin someone for inability. Yeah, I might say something to the coach. I have been known to say something like, "Hey, ya gotta move a little bit to catch those." Today, I am still sporting a bruise from a March 31 12U game where I uttered said phrase. It still hurts like hell, and when you take a regular dose of Plavix, aspirin and no telling what all this other crap does, you get pretty big bruises. This one is now bigger around that a 12-inch softball.

But I don't give a damn if I lose my leg over it (well, yeah, I do, but you know what I mean). I'm not ejecting them for being a bad catcher or a new-to-the-position catcher. I also wish they would let them "practice" at practice...or what about all those pitching machines out there. Put a few quarters in and let them catch before they start dealing with live bodies around them.

[tcannizzo]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Well, that still doesn't do it for me.

As we saw in a clip from eteamz (below) too many different possible interpretations. In the clip, the batter, in no way, shape or form committed an act of interference. Yes, she took a step when regaining her balance, but with the rewording of the rule, you have umpires making calls like we see on the clip.

In the past, the catcher knew exactly where the batter could or could not go. Because of rulings like this, the catcher will now throw through the box and the batter beware. BTW, you don't think coaches are going to take advantage of this, do you?

I'll repeat what I have said before, and what I was told by multiple members of the NUS. The calls should not be different, it's just a better worded rule. Any umpire who couldn't read a player's intent in such a play before, isn't going to be any better an umpire now.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qsfj68JjJuY&mode=related&search=

SITUATION 1: With no outs and R1 on 2B, B2 swings at and misses the pitch. R1 breaks for 3B and while F2 is throwing to 3B in an attempt to retire R1, B2, while remaining in the batter’s box, backs up to readjust their footing and bumps into F2 causing an errant throw. RULING: B2 is guilty of interference. The ball is dead, B2 is out and R1 must return to 2B. (Rule 7, Section 6 Q)

With this being posted on the ASA web site, I have a different call between 2006 and 2007.

I don't like the new call, but it is not consistent with "The calls should not be different, just better worded."