The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sun Mar 30, 2008, 10:27am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 746
of course not steve m. Your extrapolation is unwarranted.

Play 10.1.2 Asa casebook

(FP Only) R1 on 3b leads off after a pitch to B2. The pitcher, after receiving throw back from catcher legally plays back r1 to 3b. While ball is alive, F5, pitcher and catcher meet nearest pitcher's plate to consult. R1, seeing home plate unprotected, leaves 3b and crosses home plate, scoring.

Ruling: It ain't that the run scores. Time out should be called by the umpire. Place R1 back on 3b.

If ASA wants that on that play, I think it is reasonable that ASA would want umpires to correct an erroneous verbalization of outs by either team.

Now for you word masters that see the word should, imagine you are at a tournament and this play happens and the UIC just happens to be the person who wrote or approved this play for the casebook. Think you ain't going to get dinged or come out on the wrong side of this discussion.

If they are not going to allow a run to score on this play, then they certainly do not want any shenanigans by an unscrupulous coach. Not part of Amateur Softball and good sportsmanship.

They go on further in this section of the casebook, to state that umpires could reverse a result of an umpires signal when it is obvious that the signal was incorrect. (home run called and ball not over the fence).

If a boneheaded call by the umpire can be rectified (cause it placed a runner or batter in jeopardy) even though it was obvious that it was wrong to everyone in the park and should have been noticed by coaches and runners, I am quite certain ASA wants both teams to know the correct number of outs when either team incorrectly verbalizes the number of outs.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sun Mar 30, 2008, 01:42pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Twin Cities MN
Posts: 8,154
What year case book are you quoting? The most recent I have is 2007, and a very similar play is 8-8-67B. The ruling is that defensive deception cannot be allowed to entice a runner to violate the look-back rule.

You keep trying to build your case using totally disimilar situations. For example, what possible connection does an umpire's late or changed call have to do with deception?

In the general case, it is certainly not illegal for one team to try to decieve the other into making a mistake so they can score runs or put out a runner. Before you become so sure that ASA wants all deception declared as USC, perhaps you could find some rules basis for your claim.
__________________
Tom
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Who is 1st batter next inning? hawk65 Softball 13 Mon May 07, 2007 08:26am
5 strikeouts in 1 inning Lab4man Softball 16 Mon Jun 12, 2006 08:48am
Last out of inning IRISHMAFIA Softball 70 Tue Apr 12, 2005 08:28am
7th inning stretch ppahr Baseball 14 Wed Sep 03, 2003 09:42am
Between Inning Mechanics whiskers_ump Softball 10 Mon Feb 17, 2003 02:15pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:46pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1