OU vs AU

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by greymule

Saw the game but didn't see that particular play. Doesn't sound like OBS to me, either. Even under ASA's stricter rule, if the runner didn't slow down or alter her stride or have to avoid, there's no OBS. From the description, it's hard to believe this qualified under NCAA rules.

Just had a non-call at the plate in game two. The talking heads kicked the rule (shocker ).

Before you tell me they still have the about-to-receive, I am very much aware of that. The talking heads noted that the catcher (Balko) has every right to block the plate as long as the ball is on the way. Well, I don't believe that is true unless the NCAA completely changed the interpretation of the rule.

Even with that allowance, watching a shot from behind the runner, the umpire could (not "should") have called OBS as the runner seemed to have changed her path long before the ball even got close to the catcher. But the umpire isn't going to see that from his position and the ball did get to the catcher prior to the runner passing behind her. Please note, I'm not questioning the umpire's call, just an observation how much of a difference there is with the about-to-receive allowance vs. possession requirement.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Good interference call on OU. Hit and run and the batter clearly stepped out of the box. Catcher played the part and the umpire made the call.

Talking head is making an excuse saying it wasn't intentional. Idiot.

Another great comment. The ball must go over the bag in fair territory to be fair.

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Good interference call on OU. Hit and run and the batter clearly stepped out of the box. Catcher played the part and the umpire made the call.

Talking head is making an excuse saying it wasn't intentional. Idiot.

Another great comment. The ball must go over the bag in fair territory to be fair.

It was INT all the way. The talking heads have been blowing it all day long. No real surprise as we mention this stuff every year. Earlier, if you were listening, though I don't remember which games (may have been AZ/OU game 2), there was a "foul into the glove of the catcher," rather than a foul tip. And then, on another play there was a hard shot to F6 that she couldn't handle that riccocheted to F4. The talking head said "the flip to second was just a little late."

[greymule]

The talking heads noted that the catcher (Balko) has every right to block the plate as long as the ball is on the way. Well, I don't believe that is true . . .

It is not true. "The ball is on the way" could refer to a throw that has just left an outfielder's hand and is two full seconds or more from its intended target. NCAA mentions "about to receive" several times, which I and other umps I work with have taken to mean "in the immediate act of fielding" a throw, very similar to OBR.

[argodad]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Good interference call on OU. Hit and run and the batter clearly stepped out of the box. Catcher played the part and the umpire made the call.

Talking head is making an excuse saying it wasn't intentional. Idiot.

I had the outside speakers on while I was in the swimming pool (weather was too nice to be inside). I was yelling (at no one), "It doesn't have to be intentional!" Once again, my neighbors wonder about my sanity.

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by argodad

I had the outside speakers on while I was in the swimming pool (weather was too nice to be inside). I was yelling (at no one), "It doesn't have to be intentional!" Once again, my neighbors wonder about my sanity.

No. They don't WONDER about it.......