calling time ?

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by Skahtboi

Does it get worse?

No, just that it was not rec ball, not 12&U instructional, not JV, etc.; it was MLB.
I guess their rules are a lot different because no objection from the offense team.

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

No, just that it was not rec ball, not 12&U instructional, not JV, etc.; it was MLB.
I guess their rules are a lot different because no objection from the offense team.

A quick perusal of OBR finds nothing to substantiate this ruling.

It appears that their rules are just like ours, and their coaches, though paid as well as they are, are as rules knowledgeable as the majority of ours.

[MD Longhorn]

And the umpires too.

Although there is one possibility that would make this a possibly correct ruling. If PU for some reason said, "Ball Four". Can't imagine he'd do so, but if HE were the reason the runner advanced and HE were the reason the defense didn't play on him, I can see them correcting it.

What game was this, is there a video?

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

And the umpires too.

Although there is one possibility that would make this a possibly correct ruling. If PU for some reason said, "Ball Four". Can't imagine he'd do so, but if HE were the reason the runner advanced and HE were the reason the defense didn't play on him, I can see them correcting it.

What game was this, is there a video?

Phils (Ibanez R2, Ruiz B) vs. Mets Sunday.

[Welpe]

MLB, that makes sense. The umpires love coming up with rather interesting rulings at times. Like the several times they've decided to make a foul ball into a fair ball retroactively and placed runners.