The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Softball (https://forum.officiating.com/softball/)
-   -   calling time ? (https://forum.officiating.com/softball/59173-calling-time.html)

CecilOne Mon Sep 27, 2010 09:58am
calling time ?
 
Runners on 1st & 3rd, batter thinks ball 3 is ball 4, heads to 1st, R2 already off the base, head to 2nd.
PU calls time when R2 still en route, announces correct count, sends R2 back to 1st.
How many times have we talked about situations like this? :rolleyes:

MD Longhorn Mon Sep 27, 2010 01:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by CecilOne (Post 693932)
Runners on 1st & 3rd, batter thinks ball 3 is ball 4, heads to 1st, R2 already off the base, head to 2nd.
PU calls time when R2 still en route, announces correct count, sends R2 back to 1st.
How many times have we talked about situations like this? :rolleyes:
Oh no.

CecilOne Tue Sep 28, 2010 06:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by CecilOne (Post 693932)
How many times have we talked about situations like this? :rolleyes:

Runners on 1st & 3rd, batter thinks ball 3 is ball 4, heads to 1st, R2 already off the base, head to 2nd.
PU calls time when R2 still en route, announces correct count, sends R2 back to 1st.
Chapter 2:
R2, now back at 1st, is out at 2nd on the front end of a double play.

Skahtboi Tue Sep 28, 2010 08:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by CecilOne (Post 694039)
Chapter 2:
R2, now back at 1st, is out at 2nd on the front end of a double play.
Does it get worse? :cool:

CecilOne Tue Sep 28, 2010 11:07am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skahtboi (Post 694045)
Does it get worse? :cool:
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 Tue Sep 28, 2010 01:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by CecilOne (Post 694063)
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 Tue Sep 28, 2010 02:04pm
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 Tue Sep 28, 2010 02:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder (Post 694111)
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 Tue Sep 28, 2010 03:39pm
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.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:00pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1