ASA Appeals
 

Four types listed in RS 1 APPEALS.A

1. Missing a base
2. Leaving a base on a caught fly ball before the ball is first touched
3. Attempting to advance to second base after making a turn at first base.
4. Batting out of order.

Couldn't find the flashing text to go with the posting, Mike? :D

What?
 

Is that at me? Does not apply to a runner going back to base.

Let see.

1. Ball caught
2. ball caught in foul territory
3. race back to first
4. first baseman beat runner back to base but used colored section.

So again how is this a appeal not a protest?

Sorry let me tell you.

First, and only point I have, a appeal is for a violation and a protest is for a rules interpretation.

There is no violation here.

There is a rule interpitation on if the first baseman can us the colored section.

I will not insist you let everyone know you are wrong

Aw, c'mon... what have you REALLY been doing for 19 years?

Yep, sorry still not a appeal play. If it is please let me know were the violation is? W know were the rule interpretation is.

Well night all

No one is this idiotic.

You guys are falling for whatever game he is playing.

I can only hope he is playing a "goof with the blues" game and is not this stupid.

haha
funny.

I wont fall for it coach.

Please at least be like a 12U rec league coach and not some pissed off parent.

My 2nd post is in response to Coach Goofys post to me, which he of course deleted :rolleyes:

http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/3...achgoofuv0.gif

The thread is titled ASA Appeals..

but it could actually be titled

"Appeal plays in every league on earth involving a baseball or a softball under every rule set from ASA to Little League to Utrip to NFHS to Major League Baseball, to Pony, to Baseball, from Sunny and Talented California to Cold Nasty Delaware, to ISF, from Sea to Shining Sea, from sand lots, to little diamonds, from big city drug dealer filled parks to Wrigley Field and Yankee Stadium from Europe to famed and beloved Yemini Slayer of the Infidel Softball Federation"

but that probably wouldnt have fit in the title box.

Sorry to disappointed you, I changed my mind. I made a new thread.

19 days is more like it, from the basic rules knowledge I have seen displayed thus far.

I hesitate to get involved in this, but what the heck....here goes!

You are both right! The original play was a question of a rule interp (touching the colored portion of the base) during a live ball appeal of the runner leaving the base prior to the touch (item 2 in ASA appeals) Now #75 was focusing on the use of the colored portion in his original post, BUT the colored portion was attempting to be used in the act of making a live ball appeal on the runner, so Irish's reference to the appeal is a valid one to enter all rules references (which you so vividly reamed everyone for not doing) reguarding the original play.

By his own admission, he did not believe the basic play was an appeal play.You're right that he was questioning the rule interpretation of the orange base, but the whole deal got off track for two reasons:

1) He got a bee in his bonnet over the "inadequate" reply earlier to his post and came in with both barrels blasting insults and sanctimoneousness, and

2) He continued his stream of insults regarding the rule references dealing with live ball appeals for leaving early on a fly ball.

It is common for coaches to not see the leaving early as an appeal (they see it as a force out sometimes), but an umpire? Insult the board, claim lots of experience, insult the board again and display a lack of basic rule knowledge...

I have not insulted. I have not called anyoen a idiot, or even worst a coach.

and I did say in another thread, that is is a live ball appeal. I will not lie to you I really never thought of that play as a appeal, more a force. But it is a appeal since there can not be a force on a caught ball.

But to say I have continued to insult and bla bla bla is just wrong. I even apologized for saying there was no appeal. But God do not let any one else to admit they might be wrong.

Dave got it totally right. No one else did, including myself.

Why do I get the mental picture of Mr. Snorman as the umpire who always brings up the "What if" third-world situations in meetings, scores high on tests, but somehow always has problems on the field? Probably not the right picture -- but it's the one I have.