Award after obstruction on another runner

[argodad]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Thank God. Could you imagine how long the posts would be if he DID want to argue?

Well, y'all did compliment him on his well-written, complete, and clear first post!

[blueit]

It may well be my last post. This will be my last on this topic.

We've got a rule that doesn't say immediate or delayed dead ball (for the tag that makes no safe-out difference). We've got a comment that specifically says call dead ball at the end of the play, not upon the non-event tag. And we end up awarding bases or protection to runners not affected by the obstruction. None of those things seem to bother anyone here.

Evidently it's too much of a threat to the "this is how we call it" mindset
to even acknowledge that the rule is incomplete or the comment is wrong,
not to mention explore the WHY of whether a meaningless tag should kill further action. I was hoping for some real objective, 'big picture' discussion of why this SHOULD be called as it apparently is, and at least an acknowledgment that both the rule and comment need some improvement or (as to the comment) deletion.

Instead, it's just, over and over, "of course it's an immediate dead ball ... because that's how we call it."

I've taken an informal poll among 3-4 of the younger umps in our group & several of the old timers. The former group, after I've explained "how it's called", despite the casebook comment, was unanimous that "That doesn't make much sense." The latter group's reaction was, "That's how it's always been called," and they don't really want to think about whether it really makes sense or not -- that's just the way it is. It's apparent which group predominates here.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by blueit

It may well be my last post. This will be my last on this topic.

We've got a rule that doesn't say immediate or delayed dead ball (for the tag that makes no safe-out difference). We've got a comment that specifically says call dead ball at the end of the play, not upon the non-event tag. And we end up awarding bases or protection to runners not affected by the obstruction. None of those things seem to bother anyone here.

Evidently it's too much of a threat to the "this is how we call it" mindset
to even acknowledge that the rule is incomplete or the comment is wrong,
not to mention explore the WHY of whether a meaningless tag should kill further action. I was hoping for some real objective, 'big picture' discussion of why this SHOULD be called as it apparently is, and at least an acknowledgment that both the rule and comment need some improvement or (as to the comment) deletion.

Instead, it's just, over and over, "of course it's an immediate dead ball ... because that's how we call it."

I've taken an informal poll among 3-4 of the younger umps in our group & several of the old timers. The former group, after I've explained "how it's called", despite the casebook comment, was unanimous that "That doesn't make much sense." The latter group's reaction was, "That's how it's always been called," and they don't really want to think about whether it really makes sense or not -- that's just the way it is. It's apparent which group predominates here.

Let me repeat... You didn't answer my question. Where does the rule book use the term "dead ball" when it means "delayed dead ball"? You want to interpret the use of the term "dead ball" in 8-4-3b PENALTY-a as meaning "delayed dead ball". Prove it.

A couple of things you need to learn about the NFHS (or ASA or nearly any other) rule book. First, it is not a fine piece of writing. Second, it assumes the reader has familiarity with the game. Third, it uses defined terms as defined.

On point one, the so-called ambiguity you cite is not a big deal in light of points 2 and 3.

On point two, if you are unfamiliar with how the game is called, that is what clinics and training are for. Parsing the syntax of the rule book will only get you so far... see point number 1.

On point three, when the book says the ball is dead, it means it. Dead. Kaput. Playing action stops. Right then. That is the meaning of the word in the rules. It really doesn't matter what Webster might say, or whether a case play doesn't cover all possible variations or answer all possible questions. A dead ball is dead.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by blueit

It may well be my last post. This will be my last on this topic.

We've got a rule that doesn't say immediate or delayed dead ball (for the tag that makes no safe-out difference). We've got a comment that specifically says call dead ball at the end of the play, not upon the non-event tag. And we end up awarding bases or protection to runners not affected by the obstruction. None of those things seem to bother anyone here.

Evidently it's too much of a threat to the "this is how we call it" mindset
to even acknowledge that the rule is incomplete or the comment is wrong,
not to mention explore the WHY of whether a meaningless tag should kill further action. I was hoping for some real objective, 'big picture' discussion of why this SHOULD be called as it apparently is, and at least an acknowledgment that both the rule and comment need some improvement or (as to the comment) deletion.

Instead, it's just, over and over, "of course it's an immediate dead ball ... because that's how we call it."

I've taken an informal poll among 3-4 of the younger umps in our group & several of the old timers. The former group, after I've explained "how it's called", despite the casebook comment, was unanimous that "That doesn't make much sense." The latter group's reaction was, "That's how it's always been called," and they don't really want to think about whether it really makes sense or not -- that's just the way it is. It's apparent which group predominates here.

Besides Tom's excellent points, I'd just add one thing. You haven't been carefully reading the responses you are getting because this has been dealt with. For example, I provided you a case where your proposed alternative language wouldn't work and a case where your rule would just create a mess and you dropped those threads. Tom has very clearly pointed out that dead ball means dead ball and challenged you to provide a single rule book rule where that wasn't the case multiple times.
You assert that there is a case play with comment that is incorrect, but you haven't posted the whole text of it so what you see as a contradiction might well just be a case where you're missing a distinguishing factor of the play. The folks here will be happy to teach you as noted by the fact that they put up with me. They are veterans who like helping people and discussing interesting softball situations. But you have to put in a fair effort on your side and realize that you're not offering anything to them. They know how to call this and they know how to read the rule.
________
Volcano Review

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by blueit

It may well be my last post. This will be my last on this topic.

We've got a rule that doesn't say immediate or delayed dead ball (for the tag that makes no safe-out difference).

Yes, it does. I challenge you to cite the rule that even brings it into question. I reiterate, "a rule", not a TWP scenario.

We've got a comment that specifically says call dead ball at the end of the play, not upon the non-event tag. And we end up awarding bases or protection to runners not affected by the obstruction. None of those things seem to bother anyone here.

That is because we read the rules, attend/conduct clinics and schools and study interpretations provided by the powers that be. You are debating a rule that is explicitly clear as to the status of the ball.

The ONLY question is that which started this thread of where to place runners between bases when the ball, BY RULE, is declared dead. You have been given opinion, interpretation and rule applications as to how this situation can be handled.

Evidently it's too much of a threat to the "this is how we call it" mindset
to even acknowledge that the rule is incomplete or the comment is wrong,
not to mention explore the WHY of whether a meaningless tag should kill further action. I was hoping for some real objective, 'big picture' discussion of why this SHOULD be called as it apparently is, and at least an acknowledgment that both the rule and comment need some improvement or (as to the comment) deletion.

Instead, it's just, over and over, "of course it's an immediate dead ball ... because that's how we call it."

NO, IT IS AN IMMEDIATE DEAD BALL BECAUSE THE RULE SAYS SO!!!

I've taken an informal poll among 3-4 of the younger umps in our group & several of the old timers. The former group, after I've explained "how it's called", despite the casebook comment, was unanimous that "That doesn't make much sense." The latter group's reaction was, "That's how it's always been called," and they don't really want to think about whether it really makes sense or not -- that's just the way it is. It's apparent which group predominates here.

Then your group has either received some pretty poor training or you haven't been paying attention.....sorta like in this thread.

[ronald]

Ok. Did not know you guys were having fun. I saw something different from the other side.

[Skahtboi]

Wow! I miss a week of OF and of course, an argument ensues.

[argodad]

Originally Posted by Skahtboi

Wow! I miss a week of OF and of course, an argument ensues.

Heck, it's usually only 24 hours! A week makes it guaranteed.