Got anything #2

CecilOne · #1 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2008, 08:55am

I want the see the other guy's photos.

(A) "picture doesn't show if the runner altered her stride ". If she did, clearly OBS.
(B) "hard to tell if there was a tag by F2 ". If so, and not (A), out.
(C) If safe, appeal for missing plate.

(D) Ump needs cap, shirt, shorter pants, shoe polish, better position.

BretMan · #2 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2008, 09:09am

He does have a hat- I'll give him that. Unfortunately, it's not on his head. You can see it stuck in the harness of his mask.

Chess Ref · #3 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2008, 09:33am

Quote:

Originally Posted by CecilOne

I want the see the other guy's photos.

(A) "picture doesn't show if the runner altered her stride ". If she did, clearly OBS.
(B) "hard to tell if there was a tag by F2 ". If so, and not (A), out.
(C) If safe, appeal for missing plate.

(D) Ump needs cap, shirt, shorter pants, shoe polish, better position.

I'll give him a break on the shoe polish. Might be a pretty dusty field. Also I had my hat get stuck last week. First time in a long time it happened . SO he gets a minor break from me on the hat...

MGKBLUE · #4 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2008, 10:13am

I agree that this is likely nothing as it would appear the the runner did not show anything that would indicate that she was hindered or impended until F2 had possession of the ball and applied the possible tag.

The only time I would be OBS would be if the runner, slowed down because F2 was blocking the plate and such change in speed cannot be determined from the photographs.

Dakota · #5 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2008, 11:15am

Quote:

Originally Posted by MGKBLUE

I agree that this is likely nothing as it would appear the the runner did not show anything that would indicate that she was hindered or impended until F2 had possession of the ball and applied the possible tag.

The only time I would be OBS would be if the runner, slowed down because F2 was blocking the plate and such change in speed cannot be determined from the photographs.

My thoughts, too. It is not obstruction merely because of F2's position, although the PU should be thinking and looking for it based on F2's position. We can't judge OBS based on these photos, but it likely WAS obstruction, and it was NOT likely crash interference. I base this on the runner's position in #2, where she is apparently trying to protect herself, which makes it likely she also slowed down. But, we can't know that from the pics.

What was actually called?

bkbjones · #6 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2008, 12:18pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dakota

What was actually called?

The game on account of rain. Welcome to Seattle!

WestMichBlue · #7 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2008, 02:18pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dakota

but it likely WAS obstruction, and it was NOT likely crash interference. I base this on the runner's position in #2, where she is apparently trying to protect herself, which makes it likely she also slowed down.

Second the motion!

I don't think there is any question that F2 stepped into the runner's path without the ball. Should be a clear obstruction call.

The only issue (which cannot be resolved by these pics) is did she step in too late for runner to react and avoid the collison. If that is true, than no interference call and award the runner home.

WMB

wadeintothem · #8 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2008, 08:03pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by WestMichBlue

Second the motion!

I don't think there is any question that F2 stepped into the runner's path without the ball. Should be a clear obstruction call.

The only issue (which cannot be resolved by these pics) is did she step in too late for runner to react and avoid the collison. If that is true, than no interference call and award the runner home.

WMB

I know what you are saying in premise.

This is a close play at the plate.

That runner should be in the dirt.

I have little to no mercy for crappy baserunning. Obviously, this is not enough for malicious.. but if you remain standing and crash into the fielder, you are out for INT.

From what I see in the pics, I would likely rule out for crash interference.

If I saw the play and it just wasnt too bad and I didnt have OBS, I would rule her out on the tag.

I would not protect her from her horrible base running. As pic 3 indicates, there was clearly some level of impact.

DB out.

scroobs · #9 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2008, 11:10pm

It looks like the catcher gave the runner some of the back of the plate. The runner seems to be running to that area. Ball and runner are getting there at the same time from what i see. I'd have a train wreck, and a tag out in this situation. Not sure why the runner didn't slide to the back corner of the plate, but i assume that she didn't know that the ball was coming and didn't her direction from her coach to slide. I wouldn't be surprised what this umpire would call, but likely he would just call safe or out because he clearly looks clueless...

Dakota · #10 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2008, 11:11am

Quote:

Originally Posted by CecilOne

...Ump needs cap, shirt, shorter pants, shoe polish,...

At least he's not wearing shorts...

Steve M · #11 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2008, 03:56pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dakota

At least he's not wearing shorts...

Tom,
This might be more information than I needed to know

qcumpire · #12 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 20, 2008, 06:51pm

First of all he's out of position. He needs to get on the other side of the plate.

As for a possible obstruction call, it's tough to tell with the still pictures. Just her being in the baseline without the ball doesn't make it obstruction. If the runner hesitated or changed her path any I've got obstruction. If not, I've got an out on the tag.

Skahtboi · #13 (**permalink**) Fri Mar 21, 2008, 07:00pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dakota

At least he's not wearing shorts...

Wanna bet what he would be wearing in warmer weather?

NCASAUmp · #14 (**permalink**) Fri Mar 21, 2008, 07:21pm

If the runner's progress was not impeded by F2 being where she was, I've just got an out. If she was, then I might award home based on snapshots in time and not seeing the full progression of the play.

Speaking ASA, I've got no INT on this one. Sure, she didn't "give herself up," but she also didn't crash with the fielder holding the ball. Looks like they bumped, but it appeared to be a minor bump. I'm not one of those umps that says, "you have to slide or give yourself up, or else I toss you." Contact happens, and as long as it doesn't appear to be a big crash (lowering a shoulder, shoving, body-checking, etc.), I'm not going to eject you.

She's already out on the tag, there appears to be no malicious contact, and looks like the catcher is ready to make a play on any other runners on base (if there are any). Ball's live, play on.