What would you do?

[MichaelVA2000]

Originally Posted by ronald

who or what says so. 10-1-4 says different. "...If there is reasonable doubt about a ruling being in conflict with the rules (called foul when it was touched fair), the coach or captain may ask that the correct ruling be made..."

Now go to 10.3m and make your ruling.

you put the batter runner in jeopardy and now you will put the defense in jeopardy.

what a screw up!

Rule 10 ART.4....Any umpire's decision which involves judgment, such as whether a hit is fair or foul, whether a pitch is a strike or a ball , or whether a runner is safe or out, is final.

There was NO conflict with the rules when the PU called the ball foul. In the PU's judgment the ball was in foul territory when touched by a defensive player.

Rule 10 ART. 4 continues with: If there is a reasonable doubt about some decision being in conflict with the rules, the coach or captain may ask that a correct ruling be made.

There was NO rules conflict. Perhaps an error in judgment but NO misapplication of a rule.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by ronald

Youngump,

It is the 2011 rule book.

Ron

No, it's definitely not. Took me a while to figure out what you were doing, first because I went to the ASA rule book first. Then I realized that was an NFHS citation. The problem is that you changed it when you retyped it so I definitely was never going to find the part you "quoted".

The rule says very clearly that fair foul decisions are final. Then you "quoted" the section that says that application of playing rules are not final. And you edited in a quote about a foul ball that doesn't belong. I realize your goal was to have the parenthesis read as your commentary, but only after checking your reference. Please try and be more careful with your quotes.

Now as to the discussion I wouldn't hang too much on the first part of that rule from a textual analysis standpoint, but given that this conforms generally to the way we call it around here, this statement certainly agrees. Though I've always figured that if I called it fair for a fixable reason that I could switch to foul and you could argue that this precludes that in high school. I don't think that was the intent.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by youngump

No, it's definitely not. Took me a while to figure out what you were doing, first because I went to the ASA rule book first. Then I realized that was an NFHS citation. The problem is that you changed it when you retyped it so I definitely was never going to find the part you "quoted".

The rule says very clearly that fair foul decisions are final. Then you "quoted" the section that says that application of playing rules are not final. And you edited in a quote about a foul ball that doesn't belong. I realize your goal was to have the parenthesis read as your commentary, but only after checking your reference. Please try and be more careful with your quotes.

Now as to the discussion I wouldn't hang too much on the first part of that rule from a textual analysis standpoint, but given that this conforms generally to the way we call it around here, this statement certainly agrees. Though I've always figured that if I called it fair for a fixable reason that I could switch to foul and you could argue that this precludes that in high school. I don't think that was the intent.

Just for clarification, Ronald's response was correct for ASA.

I'm not talking about a questionable, close to the line fair/foul call, but an obvious brain fart by the umpire where 100% of the people saw it fair, but the umpire called "FOUL".

This may take a UIC in a tournament, but it would be award the BR 1B and place other runners appropriately. Ronald said forced, but if it is equally as obvious a runner would have reached the next base had the umpire not erred, I will probably allow him/her to keep that base.

[ronald]

I am postive everyone of you has had doubts about your decision based on judgement on an out or safe call at first and gone for assistance in Federation. I am 100% sure the rule book says that is final (actually it uses out or safe with no qualifiers). Of course a runner can not be out if somebody pulled their foot and that is why we go for help cause we have, what, reasonable doubt about our judgement. The other umpires decision is a judgement as to whether the 1st basemen pulled her foot or not. The rule book says in the first sentence that your decision is final.

I believe the use of the word decision in the second sentence includes the use of a the word decision in the first sentence. Obviously there has to be a way for umpires to correct a judgement that conflicts with the rule.

If not, I expect some of you to never ever ask for help on a pulled foot or if the catcher dropped the ball on a tag or whatever decision that you make and the whole world knows you blew it. I do not expect you to ask your partner if the ball came loose. I do expect you to ever have a conversation with you fellow umpire about a judgement call where he or she asks what did you see or however the put it when we umpires come together to discuss a call where we need some other info. Why? cause 10-3 says all judgement calls are final. The end all is that no umpire can go for help on anything that he or she has judged as explicitly stated in 10.4 and any other judgement call because it is final.

The third sentence allows the calling umpire to ask for other umpire for info to make his final decision.

Bootom line is

what does the word decision apply to?

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by ronald

Bootom line is

what does the word decision apply to?

The outcome of the umpire's judgement even if it differs from an initial call.

I think the word to clarify is not "decision", but "final" meaning that they are not changeable by coaches' disagreement, official protests, UIC, or anyone else but the calling umpire.