Help on "tag"
 

Girl in rundown between 2nd and 3rd. F6 chases her back to 2B, F6 reaches out and tags runner as runner begins to dive back to 2B. Runner is now on the ground and F6s momentum causes her to trip over the down runner. As F6 hits the ground, the ball comes out of her glove. The ball was securely in her possession until that point.

Is the tag rule like the catch rule where there has to be voluntary release, i.e., no out on this play, or is this an out if secure possession is retained through the act of applying the tag and releasing the glove from the runners body?

IMO, she must have a voluntary release of the ball, just like a catch. I remember this has been discussed before and seems there were some differences of opinion. She did not, IMO, demonstrate control of the ball in your situation.

I agree with DH - based on your description - the fielder did not have control of her body, so the tag is not completed until you see a voluntary release. If the runner is now on the base, I've got the runner as Safe.

Agreed.

There is no such requirement. To begin the voluntary release is one of the options to help umpires determine a catch. Rule 1.Catch Problem is that the scenario has absolutely nothing to do with a catch.

Since there was no question presented of the fielder's possession of the ball before the tag or after a tag, the runner should be out.

IMO, If the ball came out at the time of the tag, you have a safe call. The act of falling causing the ball to be dropped, I think she is out on the tag. Either way you most likely will have a coach to talk to.

I see your point so don't think I'm arguing with you. But my only question is that why is the requirement there for a catch and not a tag? Same principle isn't it?

I know you will make me make a case for my point so....I think demonstrating control of a tag involves the same issue, did they control the ball. If they have a voluntarily release, no doubt they had control. If they drop the ball, such as on a tag, it is impossible to know at exactly what point they began to lose possession/control. It could have been immediately when tag was applied or not.

Also, could one make the case that F6, in this scenario, actually had caught the ball, assuming a throw from another fielder, and did not have a voluntary release? Same thing if she caught the batted ball and ran the runner back?

I think I would have to see an out on this call. Rule or nuance or not.. in general drop = safe.

If I'm gonna sell a "out" on this play, and take the heat to sell "out" on a dropped ball.. there has better have been some dancing ballerina type control displayed before the trip and drop of the ball. If there is even a hint of a question of control = safe.

From the way I am reading the OP, I believe that I will have to side with Mike on this one. It sounds as if there was no question of control as the play was made, simply that she lost the ball when she fell. From what I am reading this sounds like an out.

No. How can you make a tag if you don't already have possession of the ball?

Okay, again, a voluntary release is NOT a requirement to determine a catch or control of the ball.

Why are people trying to turn this into a TWP? This is a no brainer. F6 has possession of the ball, makes a tag, F6 still has possession of the ball. At this point, the runner is out. This is undeniable. F6 then trips over retired runner, falls and loses control of the ball.

Then you would never call an out when a defender loses the ball on the transfer when trying to turn a double play?

What willis?

If I have to explain that to you......



Besides, it is, "Whatchoo talkin' 'bout, Willis?"

Yeah willis, splain it to me.

Splain to me how you got from someone in a situation where they apply the tag, trip and drop the ball to a fielder dropping it on the transfer.

Hey one thing you gotta love about a mens game.. they are smart enough that EVERYTHING is on the transfer... no matter what they did, they start yelling "it was on the transfer"

Is that whatchoo talkin bout?

Is the discussion not possession of the ball and executing a play for an out? Would this not be an issue involving both?

Hell, talk about no control or voluntary release......half the time the ball doesn't even see the inside of the glove.

Its baseball, but this thread has some interesting discussion on this question:


http://www.umpire.org/modules.php?na...ewtopic&t=6297

Not really concerned about what baseball umpires have to think about this as they have so many sets of rules within their game, they will never agree.

ASA, NSA, NCAA, PONY, USSSA, NAFA, ISF, ISC, USFA. Feel free to add your on initial set here.

I can see where the many rule sets of Baseball would get you down.:cool:

True, I haven't found any disagreement on this issue amongst softball umpires. ;)

But, so noted.

DQ'ed for padding this list. USFA has no rules. :D

Point taken, but there is a difference. Each of those organizations have their own rules set.

In baseball, it's more like a free-for-all where in many cases, entire sects of umpires from the same association or "camp" cannot come to agreement on whether the sun is shining or not.

Play at the plate, catcher has the ball cleanly in her glove and makes the tag on runner sliding in. Big pile up as they meet. Why do we hesitate and look for the ball. If ball is rolling around we have a safe. Even though the catcher had "control" of the ball at time of tag, if she doesn't have it when the dust settles we have a safe don't we? Or is runner out immediately when tag is made?

We hesitate because the catcher had control of the ball immediately before the tag and if we see she does not have the ball in her possession immediately after the tag, then we know she must have drop it during the tag.

That, in my opinion, is a bit different than a catcher completing the tag, while still in control of the ball, and then tripping over a bat, mask or retired runner after we have seen that she did indeed maintain control of the ball during act of tagging the runner.

Because, the OP stated that F6 had control all the way through the tag, then fell over the runner. In your sit, you see F2 with control as the runner arrives, but you're not sure she maintained it through the tag because of all the dust you're waiting to settle. The OP appeared sure that the ball was still in the glove immediately following the tag.

But... I've got one for you. Bases loaded, no outs. Batter hits squib to F1, who eventually picks it up and throws it home. The F2 catches the ball and immediately tries to tag R1 (DMC, but it was 10U) who is arriving at the plate and the ball comes loose. Ball got there first, but the tag attempt was immediate, so I couldn't be 100% sure of control. Give them the force or not?

What is so hard to understand? I'm sorry, but you are looking for something that doesn't exist.

I cannot make it any simpler than I already have.

You're discussing a catch, not the same play or situation.

Sometimes you have to separate black/white mumbo jumbo goof off stuff on a mb vs real life.

You have a slide play and that ball ends up rolling around on the ground.. you have one call..

That is called this..

"SAFE"

or in lieu of that, if you are a baseball guy you can do this

"safe safe safe" signal safe 6 times, point to the ground "its safe there its on the ground HE DROPPED IT" and signal safe a few more times for emphasis.

Regardless of what you do, you call anything else and you goofed it up imo... and the heckling you should receive.. well you will receive it, so enjoy it.. you earned it.

I simply believe you are wrong on this one, no disrespect intended.

Going back to the original post the momentum of the play caused the fielder to fall and the ball came out as a result of the continuation of the original play. She did not control the ball and I have a safe.

If she tagged the runner took a couple of steps, on her own, then fell I have a different outcome.

The key in the original post is that the play was fluid and the momentum caused the losing of the ball.

uh..
NO.

She dropped the ball.
Hello!?!?

Why is this a question?

Sometimes you cant take this message board stuff to the field. Theory is great discussion, you will learn tons, some of it stays right here, never to the diamond ever.

This convo is one of them situations IMO.



Look,

You have situations where they catch the ball for the FORCE at 1B for the 3rd out and they throw the ball away so quickly as they run off the field.. it almost looks like a drop. Everyone saw it, everyone knows it.. you dont call that safe.. no tie base to the runner, no "she didnt have control"

Thats a out. Thats the call you make.

They catch the ball and are walking away and fall into a gopher hole, tripping, and dropping the ball.

That is an out. It already was an out, but now after the play, she tripped. We know its still an out. You dont change that to safe, thats out.

Some play, any play, were the end result is people in the general vicinity from both teams, a little dust, and a guy in blue thinking "damn these spandax pants are hot those big liars", and a yellow ball on the ground.

That is safe.

Thats the call you make.

You try and sell any real team or coach on "well she had possession at the time of the tag and dropped it immediately after..."

Ha! Thats a hoot.

Safe.

I can pretty much guarantee that my interpretation is correct. You might want to check Case Play 8.2-2 which is similar showing once the out occured, subsequent loss of the ball is irrelevant to the out.

There is no such thing as a continuation play in ASA ball. Going back the the original post, it was clearly stated that F6 had control of the ball after the tag. Too bad because there is no difference.

Aahhhh...no. The player tripping over the prone retired runner and the subsequent contact with the ground is what caused the ball to drop.

We beat this to death three years ago.


http://forum.officiating.com/showthr...ht=control+tag

wow, you were way worser wrong on that call than this one. This one I could at least see either way.

You dont make that call.

This is yet another thread I would never recommend for a new umpire.

Dont go looking to call this out on a field with actual ball players on there.

Great message board fodder though.

Along the same lines..................
Ground ball to 1,4,5,or 6 - doesn't matter.
Throw hits F3 in leg and goes to ground and lays still in front of bag.
F3, with foot on base, picks ball up with glove palm down. Glove comes up 8-10 inches or so with ball in it.
But as glove goes up further, ball falls to ground.
I do the ever embarassing OUT - SAFE, but get no arguments and play goes on since all see the ball on the ground.
After all the discussions on this thread, and the 2005 thread, I'm wondering what ya all say???
Thanks

No one on this board can tell you unless they were there. Speaking ASA, if you judged F3 had control of the ball while contacting the base, out is an appropriate call. Obviously, from your call, you judged F3 did not get control of the ball.

I say work on your timing so you dont do an out/safe when the ball falls on the ground.

Dont even let it creep into your mind that Irish is right on this and go on a real life ball field and call a girl out with the ball on the ground. He's goofing around for teaching purposes. He doesnt make this call. He would have been scourged and drawn and quartered with all the mens ball he has done.

True, but that's why theirs is great theoretical discussion :D

As wade says, there's a big element of 'expected call' that you can't get from the rulebook on this, it's a lot more clear in live action than trying to type a sitch on a forum.

Don't believe that for a second. If I judge the fielder had control of the ball after a tag, I'm calling the out. I'm not going looking for trouble, but I certainly am not going to back off a valid call because of perception.

The problem that there are umpires that believe a ball on the ground means the runner cannot be out is just as ridiculous as those who believe a runner cannot be called out if the tag is high on the player's body.

It all depends on how and when the ball got on the ground, just as the outcome of a high tag relies upon whether it occured before or after the runner contacts (and maintains contact with) the base.

For the first time in a long time I find myself in agreement with you ;)

Pheeww! I was beginning to think no one would straighten this out. :eek:

The OP clearly separates the tag from the fall and that the ball being dropped was from the fall, not the tag. Fielders never keep the ball for a souvenir after a tag, unless it's the last out of the championship. ;)

Besides, baseball+ interesting = oxymoron. :p

Operative words being "couldn't be 100% sure of control", so an out would be a guess. :eek: :o

Did you see both of those this weekend?

Someone please remind me NOT to umpire in CA.

Nothing more needs to be said, so of course, I'll now say something! :D :rolleyes:

There are two ways of looking at these kinds of plays... the "overly precise, statement of fact web board discussion way", and the "see it in the game way".

Ideally, the call is the same, but in reality, it won't be. Simply put, in a play like the OP and the variations discussed here, it is all too clear to state for the web board facts like Such absolutes are frequently not so clear in real time.

If you are sure possession was secure at the time of the tag and that the loss of possession was not related to the tag, then call the out (and be prepared for the uproar from fans, coaches, players, etc., etc., all of them screaming "the ball's on the ground, Blue").

But, if you are not sure, the ball rolling around on the ground is all the evidence you need for the safe call.

I've never bought into the principle of making the expected call even when you know it to be incorrect (as promoted by some on the baseball board), but that is NOT the same thing as being sure of the out before you call the out.

Yes, I did, as did you.

Saw a ball on the ground, but the BU did not. The BU properly went to his partner when asked and reversed his call. On that play, it was clear, the ball was lost on contact with the runner whom executed a legal slide.

I also saw a couple of outs called on players where the runner was tagged at knee level or above (including one in my game).

We got real players out here. It pretty tough for east coasters, who's best gold teams are about equivalent to our B teams, to keep up.

I also doubt you would have a very good time out here trying to sell our 14-18U/G coaches that a drop ball was "really in possession at the time of the tag, until she dropped it, so its an out".

That may work out there.. it doesnt wash in the home of softball land.

So heres your reminder.. stay in DE.


:D

In ALL plays where the defender has caught the ball and applies a tag but the collision jars the ball loose, the argument could be made that at the nano second of the tag, the player has possession.. and as of that exact nano second the player is out, the rest of the play is irrelevant.

So by rule, thats an out.

That makes as much sense as calling a by the book strike zone or anything else that requires a little common sense and ..

you know um, judgment.

Which is why I called her safe. The DC didn't agree, of course.

If you only had a clue. Do you honestly believe your BS? Do you think we are not aware of the advantages of warm-weather teams. Then again, many of the girls on the east coast actually have a life outside of softball and aren't dumb enough to chase that scholarship carrot.

What's the matter, no balls for tough calls? Every year that we have had CA teams here, the coaches have always gone out of their way to thank the umpires after the tournaments.

Don't have a problem with that. I've worked with some good umpires from your area and many other parts of the country. I'll take any of the umpires from this region any day, any tournament.

But I have a little problem keeping them in DE. I have umpires that are being requested to work nationals without their names even being submitted. Wonder why that is?

:confused:

Yeah, 7 of your Cal 18 Gold teams came to Auburn, AL, this past weekend, thinking the same thing. There were 6 Gold berths available; they went home with none. 5 of the 6 stayed in our Territory (the 6th went to Kansas City, MO), 2 to Georgia, 1 to Florida. Pretty much east coast.

Better stop sending those B teams east.

HA! Well I guess the fight for tieing for 43th place is going to be real tough with all those good AL teams in the running then.

Hmm

Now thats a d@mn good question Mike.

No, I dont guess I believe all of my BS.

Gotta have some fun though.

:D

If you are going to credit a statement to me, at least make it accurate. What you don't get is that umpires in the East really don't give a $hit about how good the teams are here or there. We don't have a horse in that race. Most only care that they have the opportunity to see and umpire good competitive ball, not watch some team march on and off a field and perform cadenced calisthentics.

We know the competitive teams from CA are good and they should be when dedicating 70% of one's youth to practice and playing. But that's their parents choice because they are foolish enough to believe their daughter is the next Fernandez, Mendoza, Finch, etc. So much money wasted that could go to better use.

to bad you dont have real umpires... especially if they ignore rules and rule books like you. When was the last time you were on the east coast... as I recall we have the only pitcher who shut out the USA team.... so much for not having real players huh?.. here is your reminder CAL isnt as good as you think it is...

Dont be so touchy.

Boy you guys on the east coast take being 2nd fiddle way to hard.

The only thing worse, is east coast AND SOUTH.

That said, there is no argument Tincher is good... almost good enough to make the team when she tried out.

Almost.

You should tell that to your new buddy from VA.

He cares A LOT.

This is a very important issue to him.

But good enough to shutout the team she was cut from... hmm something is wrong with your logic. I dont recall a PAC-10 team shutting down USA...While yes the PAC-10 is dominant it doesnt mean were second fiddle by any means... and just because you wont enforce rules correctly and wont call the strike zone as the book says doesnt mean I am touchy. Go to an NCAA evaluation and try calling a zone that is not the one by book.. let me know how that goes

Are you saying you think it should be called Team California (oh and Cat) at the olympics? Or maybe Team PAC10?

Is that what you are saying?

Guess I was wrong. :rolleyes:

"My daddy can beat your daddy!

Well oh yeah? Your mommy wears combat boots!

nyah nyah nyah ny yah yah

I can walk over to the pre-school playground and get the same maturity I just read here. We're better than this, my friends. :mad:

I just caught up on this thread and somehow Dakota it seems like this is your doing....:cool:

Though we almost have reached the level of the rappers when they had their East-West sitchs:D

Hey... :mad:

;)

I grew up on the West coast as a person and as an umpire and have now lived on the east coast for over 15 years. The East coast is coming along, ans a lot faster than the west, but when half of the states were still playing SP softball in High school as late as the early 90's it is going to take a while for the knowledge base and experience of coaches to catch up.

Shamrocks were the 18G national champions in this decade, with a majority of East coast players; VT did no hit USA with a VA pitcher, but these are the two examples that Easterners can throw out there. How many examples of West coast teams beating East coast powers are there?

Nah, not really ;) :D

mommy wearing combat boots... hmm depends on what you like I guess....;)

I get what your saying and by no meens am I saying that the east coast has caught the west coast in softball yet but to say that east coast doesnt have "real players" is rediculous and that was the issue I was taking with wade's comments. Im about to go UMW ... you know what I mean

When I first read this, it reminded me of my time in the panhandle of FL and all the BS politics in Santa Rosa and Escambia counties back in the 70's.

Larry may be able to relate. When I lived there, the only thing in his town was a roadside picnic area off of US 90 (with a swimming hole occasionally visited in the dark of night), but he is right :o

Let's wrap this one up.

Unfortunately ... that hasn't improved very much. But I expect much less from politicians. :rolleyes:

um... is this rhetorical?

VT beat Olympic Team California.. on a couple of IP's virginia umps spotted em. :D .. and some darn fine pitcher almost good enough to be on Olympic Team California.

Other than that, um .. just about every other time?

Wade:

Actually it was supposed to be rhetorical. The Umps were all mid west by the way. Nice job of selectively choosing which part of the response to quote though, you should be in advertising for the movies.

Hey? You sure them umps werent virginia umps trying to make up for 150 years of getting their buts kicked on EVERY field? :cool: :D
;)
I mean, had VT done well in the WCWS (like perhaps winning a game or something), there could have been at least something to be proud of, and that would have been something!

AHEM...
2 to Georgia
1 to Florida
1 to KC
1 to Texas
1 to TULSA, OK

Give one of my home town Tulsa teams some credit where it is due!!

No lack of credit. Unlike my left coast friend, I don't consider Texas or Oklahoma to fit the definition of east coast, and that was the point. But, its seems he sees them all as part of Alabama (when they beat Cali teams in Alabama).

On the other hand, just a touch more seismic activity, and we could make Arizona and Nevada the left coast, and end all that noise .......

THAT is completely untrue.

Florida is like a right coast Cali.

And the rest of you all are like that Appalachian Emergency room on SNL.

:p

Wishful thinking that... especially after Wade's following post.

He's got us there, because all of the fine higher learning institutes are on the West coast, IVY League, Georgetown, UVA, William and Mary, MIT. All of them were originally founded in CA and then moved east.

I know that now he is going to mention Stanford, but will drop the reply after the final exam is posted.:cool:

Hey, weird you mention them.. one of Stanford's catchers let me get my pinkie finger darn near broke last weekend and I still cant move it.

Dont hate the player brotha, hate the game. Hate the game.

Dang I guess Im not good enough for that exam.....;)

Hey, then Arizona could become the dominant softball power in the country....and have a beach......Hmmmmm....:)

Wouldn't see me crying if California seceded from the Union. ;)

Or fell into the ocean (but of course, all umpires from this forum would jump off in time).

"And take your anti-gun hippies with you!"