Dropped third strike?
 

This was 11-12 softball. Dropped third strike applies.

2 outs. 2 strikes on batter. No scoreboard, players not paying attention to umpire.

Uncaught third, batter doesn't run. Ball is thrown back to pitcher who gets on the rubber because she thinks there is another pitch. Coach, who is aware of the count, yells at pitcher to throw to first, which she does without disengaging rubber.

What should be the call?

Rita

You have the batter-runner out. There can be no other pitch to the batter, as his/her turn at bat has ended with the U3K. So the pitcher taking a position on the pitcher's plate means nothing in this situation.

Rita, you may consider this insignificant, but it really isn't.

There is no "rubber" in softball. If you really think you are a softball umpire, then you should call it what SOFTBALL calls it; a pitcher's plate. Just like no mound; that is the circle.

Respect the game, use the game's terminology.

That said, it really matters NOT that the pitcher happened to be in contact with he pitcher's plate while making a play. Not a pitch, therefore not an illegal pitch. The question, like the terminology, reeks of baseball, not softball.

IN NFHS:

In NCAA:

If the pitcher took her position to pitch to the next batter (not realizing that the previous batter is not out yet) on the pitcher's plate why wouldn't she have to disengage before throwing to first? Seems like a pretty reasonable softball question to me. Somebody's smell-o-meter seems to be off. It would seem that the determining factor in the above rule sets is whether the pitcher in a position to deliver a pitch.

Rita - what rule set applied to the game in question?

It isn't insignificant to use the word "reeks" either.

As it happens I am a baseball umpire and I do understand that game better than I do softball. However, I am umpiring softball in a local association because the assignor respects me as an official and as an umpire and he asked me to umpire games for him.

One of the reasons he respects me is because he knows that I will do my best to learn the game and to call it as it should be called. But there are only two in the association (it's a very small association) who know the game well enough to answer the questions I have. So I come here for different explanations that will expand my knowledge.

Now the softball rulebook says that the pitcher may not throw to a base when in contact with the plate. I am trying to learn the intricacies of softball. You say it doesn't matter in this case. OK.

I will endeavor to use the correct terminology for the game if I ask more questions. It isn't a matter of respect for the game. That I show by trying to learn more about how to call the game. Using the correct terminology is respecting that it matters to you and others.

Rita

Marvin, the situation happened in a Little League softball game but they have the same rule as NFHS. So I wondered how the same situation might be called in other rules sets.

Thank you for your answer. I'm hoping to get more answers to get a full understanding of the rule and it's application.

Rita

Rule 6-3, ART. 7 . . . The pitcher shall not throw to a base while a foot is in contact with the pitcher’s plate after having taken the pitching position.

There is no batter yet so there can be no penalty.

Ignore it and allow the play.

Joel

Sorry I didn't make my point clear the first time. :rolleyes:

The at bat is over, therefore when the pitcher throws to first base, the batter runner would be out. There is a play that needs to be made, and the pitcher's making it. F1 is not taking the pitching position because you would not allow her to pitch another pitch to this same batter.

At least I'd hope not. :eek:

"respect the game"? How about respecting the people trying to learn more about the game!!



FYI- 90% of the time "the object in the circle the pitcher starts with both feet on or touching" is referenced; it is called the rubber- by players, coaches, umpires, and sellers of the product.

To have a legal pitch, you need to have a batter in the batter's box. By rule, this (former) batter is now a batter-runner. You can't throw a pitch to one of those! Therefore, the pitcher cannot be "in the pitching position".

So, as an umpire, you aren't expected to use the proper RULEBOOK terminology? It's okay to call interference obstruction or vice versa whenever you make up a statistic like 90% of the time others use the wrong term?

Or, are you expected to read the rulebook, use the terms defined in the game in the way the rulebook uses them, and discuss the game with others using the proper terms? How about teaching the proper terms to the 90% by using them whenever you talk about them?

So, you are saying that after talking to EVERYONE in the world that has anything to do with the game (man, that must have taken years :rolleyes:), you have concluded that 90% use the improper technology.

Hey, Steve, congrats! We are in the top 10%, YAHOO!!! :D

QUOTE by Gulf coast blue:
Rule 6-3, ART. 7 . . . The pitcher shall not throw to a base while a foot is in contact with the pitcher’s plate after having taken the pitching position.

There is no batter yet so there can be no penalty.

Ignore it and allow the play.

Joel


Now this sounds like BB to me! Ain't this sounds like a balk?
Without a batter present in SB I have nothing! F1 ain't pitching if there's no batter present...

Rita,
forget the crap you're getting from our fellow umpires, for being a BB-ump.
Buy, loan, lease or steel (only I you can't afford it) a SB-rulebook (in the rule set by your fed.) read it and ask any question you want over here!!! We are here to help any umpire, regardless where you're coming from. I'm a dutch blue and was taken in this community without questioning my back ground. (I could be a former soccer ref.:(, ain't that be like cursing in a church? :oOr I could have a white skin, blue eyed and blond hair:eek:) So why should I, or anyone else over here, question your background???:cool:

LL in Europe sounds to me like BB, but then different. More paying attention to safety than to SB rule-sets... :confused:
Can't say I like it very much or understand it complete. (What's the difference?)

In ISF/ESF this sit. doesn't occur, or at this level it shouldn't. If it did, I would not let F1 take any actions that would result in a pitch; legal or illegal. If she want's to throw to B1 while in contact with the PP (or if you prefer: the rubber - I alway think it's a rubber if it's from Durex -) let her! I won't give a penalty to F3 if she's throwing while in contact with B1. F1 is a fielder, cause there isn't a batter present - not a pitcher at that moment...

Like Joel said: "Ignore..." The rest will follow... Good luck and have fun!

Rita maybe inexperienced/new to umpiring softball and not yet up to speed on all the intricacies and nuances of the rules and terminology of the game. But she is an experienced baseball and basketball official who, while perhaps new to the Softball board, posts on both the Baseball and Basketball boards of this Forum in a manner that always reflect not only a genuine desire to become a better official but also a high level of respect for the sports she officiates, the rules and fellow officials.
Glad to see you're getting involved in softball Rita. The sport needs good umpires no matter what level or rule code. Good luck.

And if you ask me, she's kind of cute!!!

I suggest crucial conversations. a lot of narratives going on and not genuine dialogue.

Okay, we are talking about something that has an origin which predates baseball or softball, but I'll start.

Well, for starts, why isn't the PU standing away from the plate with the mask removed awaiting a play? That isn't a batter standing there, it is a BR and a play imminent and the umpire's actions should be eminent.

This being the case, I'm with the blue from Nassau County (presumedly), there is no pitch to be had until the previous play is complete.

:oAWH gee. So are you.

Rita

I have the rulebook and casebook for NFHS and Little League. But learning to officiate a sport also requires learning how to officiate with the book, so that when an odd situation surfaces, one can make a call and sell it.

With the emphasis on illegal pitches this year, I am learning a lot that just can't be taught just from a book.

Rita

I, like Hugo (I know his Real name).......a guy never forgets Hugo.........:D

I have seen you on the boards since the 90's and know that were asking an honest question.

Take the majority here.........you cannot have a pitching violation unless there is a batter. Just call the play as you see it.

Joel

I've watched a ballgame with him at Tropicana Field!

Rita:cool:

Can you at least forget some of my dumber posts???:D

I have no problem using proper rulebook terminology when in a formal setting such as a clinic. But in normal conversation I am going to use what I use and for sure not going to chastise someone for not using "umpire-ese"

Side question for you. You get asked to be the radio guy for a local college or high school game because the normal person is out. Are you going to say things like "ground ball to F5 who throws to F3 for the out" and "base hit up the middle for B3 who is trying to stretch it to second, here comes the throw and oh the batter runner is out."

While I agreed that the tone of the post that prompted this discussion was a little off base, I agree with the sentiment - which is to use the proper terminology. Pointing out the difference adds to the knowledge of person who is open to learning. I'm pretty sure Rita will use the proper term from now on.

And I disagree completely with the rest of your above post.

1) This IS a SOFTBALL discussion forum. Although not a formal clinic, it is specifically directed at those who are interested in the proper way of administering softball. Knowingly using the improper term demonstrates a certain lack of respect for the game.

2) Your "side question" is pretty lame......

Like I said... the tone of the chastising post may have been off base, but pointing out the terminology was a teaching experience....

What??? :eek: Hugo's not his real name? :)

To Rita, and anyone else insulted by the post above.

The last sentence was unnecessary, and inappropriate. I apologize for that; I had a bad day, was already short umpires (as an assignor), had to work 5 straight 16A games with teams that are ASA National caliber to free an umpire to work elsewhere, and STILL had a no-show on another site that got me cussed out numerous times that day.

Stopped and drank a few, then came home, shouldn't have posted that.

The rest of the post I stand behind. Use rulebook terminology in every possible setting, and especially only use defined terms as used in the rulebook.

thought so. :cool:

Thank you for the apology. I appreciate it.

Rita

You da man!!!

Referring strictly to the paragraph above.

I find that when among folks that are not familiar with the proper terminology is the one time an umpire should be sure to use the correct words, phrases and rule citations.

How are they to learn if you fall into their world of inappropriate use of terms? I'm not suggesting an umpire correct them, but to respond with the appropriate terms, phrases and citations. Doing otherwise just creates confusion and frustration among the players when the encounter those who do it right. Don't believe me, ask those who have UIC a national tournament how many questions they get about "perceived" rules because that is what "Ol' Smitty" back home has been telling them for years.

One of my pet peeves is an umpire that calls pitches "deep" in the SP game especially if they make a motion over the shoulder with it. This is a serious issue when it comes to umpires who call the games and strike zones properly. It is either a ball or a strike. Don't think the word "deep" ever appears in the rules, yet hundreds of umpires, players and fans routinely use it even though there is no value to the term, but someone probably gets ejected every day because of the frustration felt when umpires will not call it "their way".

It is a disservice to the teams and fellow officials to not be professional which includes the proper usage of terms and phrases.

I don't really care whether you've used the right words here or which sport you started working in...

There is NO RULE SET, in either sport, in which the infielder who happens to be near the center of the diamond (aka the pitcher) is penalized for touching the object from which he or she normally pitches when throwing to first base in order to retire a batter-runner. (Honestly, I'm surprised an experienced umpire in EITHER sport would even consider this a problem for even the shortest of moments).

Hopefully someone somewhere will recognize that you, the umpire, have moved out from behind the plate and it will be obvious to SOMEone that there is no eminent pitch.

Honestly, while you may be a bit bristled by the way the comments were delivered, if you want to be respected in this profession you should at least learn the correct words. The pitcher's plate or the circle are not umpire-ese. I tell you this for your benefit, discard if you must: If I was to hear my partner or another umpire around the water cooler call it "the mound" or "the rubber", my respectometer would immediately decrease several notches - and this is likely true for those you might work with one day.

I've already found that it is best to avoid the "leap" and "crow hop" terms with coaches and stick to "replant".

Rita

But that's part of the learning of the sport: Just how literally does one take parts of the ruleset.

I now know one must be VERY careful on the terminology.

Rita

Why? Each is a separate act and violations and referring to them as the same is often the cause of consternation among officials.

Folks ignorant of the rules like the term "crow hop" and use it for almost everything they think is an illegal pitcher.

In the opposite direction, I find that the TH doing softball on TV often mention "leaping" immediately upon any called IP before they even look at it on replay. A fair amount of time they are correct. However, there are times when while watching the replay, they talk about the "leap" when the it is evident that the pitcher replanted which is a crow hop, not a leap. But they rarely let the facts get in the way of a strong, yet incorrect, comment. :rolleyes:

Why? Because I think the coaches have their own definitions as well.

Rita

So you perpetuate ignorance?

Would you refer to an IP in a softball game as a balk if that is what the coach believes it is?

Do you rule interference on an OBS call because that is what the players think it is?

Nope, cannot agree with you. Next thing you know, you will be referring to R3 as the runner on 3B, R2 as the runner on 2B or R1 as the runner on 1B.

Well... completely literally ... but in context - and with proper definitions in mind. What rule in what set do you see that can be misinterpreted to mean what you implied it to mean in the OP?

Not sure what you are asking. But I think you know that it simply says in the NFHS rule book that the pitcher is not to throw to a base when in contact with the pitching plate. It does not say: Unless making a play on a BR.

Rita

Nope. Just keeping things simple. It doesn't really matter how you want to call the replant. It's simply a replant. I haven't seen consistency in the definition of a crowhop yet. Or in the calling of it.

Rita

I've already found that it is best to avoid the "leap" and "crow hop" terms with coaches and stick to "replant".

Rita


And a leap? You do know it is not the same thing as a crow hop, don't you?

Yes, dear.

Rita

You know the difference, yet you refer to a "leap" as a replant because you think that is what the coaches believe?

Thanks for playing. We now return to our regular programming.

The pitcher is not "the pitcher" at this point. He's just an infielder making a play during a live ball.

Isn't a leap also considered a replant?

See? I realize I'm relatively new to the sport but I do think that you all would be more encouraging to new people if you could patiently explain rather than rudely ridicule.

Rita

No, which is what I stated in an earlier post.

Which is where I was heading. When you began telling me how you handle it and I questioned that. However, instead of trying to learn, you seemed to be more interested in telling me how players and managers have their own langauge and you rather communicate at an amateur level instead of using the proper terminology which, IMO, helps others learn.

A major point on game management is for an umpire to listen to a coach's argument/issue, they just may have a point. In turn, if you are talking, you aren't listening.

Don't take it personally, Rita. Mike rudely ridicules everyone eventually. ;)

I AM trying to learn. However, I will be the first to admit that I may have some things learned wrong so far which I have to get corrected. I have been told that a leap is a replant. Apparently I was told wrongly.

It took the same process to learn to call baseball. A lot of umpires for baseball have some wrong ideas that they teach as fact. It took a while to sort it all out.

And coaches do have their own language. That has to be learned as well.

Rita

First off Rita, welcome to the Softball board! I agree some of the regular posters here are not very nice to new people. I think they forget they were new once, and someone had to help them learn the ways of the softball game. They have little to no patience for new people anymore, and part of that comes from the fact that they have dealt with people over and over that have come to the site(s) that they frequent (some of them frequent SEVERAL sites) and dealt with countless people that post using the wrong terminology which gets their skives in a wad since they are trying to envision the play to make a ruling. But because of the incorrect terminology used it ends up being a totally different situation (not in your case, most should know what the “rubber” is when you say it even though the correct softball term is “pitching plate”, but some have the R1 on first R3 on 3rd which is a different play from R1 on 3rd and R2 on 1st ). I think you have been beat up enough about that issue.

I do agree with your concept on not telling the coach / player they leaped or crow hopped during a game. I tell them what I saw that made me call an illegal pitch. And Irish, no I don’t want to continue to perpetuate ignorance but on the field during a game is not the time to teach the correct terms. I am not willing to get into a debate during the game over why it’s a leap vs a crow hop. And what’s worse than saying they “crow hopped” when they had a perfect deep valley drag away from the pitching plate but they still had their hands together when they left the plate, thus starting their pitch from somewhere other than the pitching plate which is a crow hop. Every Tom, Dick and Harriet saw that back foot on the ground but you called it a crow HOP, come on blue get a clue. I am going to say “you started your pitch in front of the pitching plate”, or “you have to start your pitch while in contact with the pitching plate”. Or if they leap, “both feet were airborne at the same time” or “you have to keep that back foot on the ground”. Could I have said “your leaping”? Sure, but then I open up the “No that’s a crow hop” type of response from someone (usually on the offensive side) and that leads to every mom and dad on both sides thinking I’m an idiot calling the wrong thing illegal. So this is one area where I say its illegal and here is why.

Ok I’m going to start another thread about this because I know this will get things going. A crow hop is starting the pitch from somewhere other than the pitching plate. Pitcher has hands together and leaps, drags or steps forward then starts their pitch (separates their hands). This is starting the pitch from somewhere other than the pitching plate. Usually, but not always, when they reach this new starting point they replant and push off from this point in front of the pitching plate as they start the pitch. A leap is just that both feet are airborne at the same time. Usually when they land they are already well into the windup and deliver the pitch shortly after they land. There is not usually any replant or push off after they land, just the force of them being airborne and driving toward the batter is the advantage. Again, this is why I prefer not to use terminology like “leap”, “replant” or “crow hop” during a game, we as umpires can’t always agree and will argue for 50 posts on this forum, who wants to have that sort of debate during a game?? Not me!!!!

I also think the point of using textbook terminology and wording whenever possible (whenever it helps and not hurts) is a good idea. It helps eliminate confusion and misinterpretation. I know this sounds like it’s in direct contrast to my last comment about NOT describing an illegal pitch as a “leap” or “crow hop”, and maybe it is a little bit. But the way I look at it, by saying why I called it illegal I am giving them the information they need to ‘fix’ that illegal pitch and make it legal. Most would not know the correct definition and might continue to have there hands together when they push off from the pitching plate. When I say use rulebook terminology I mean saying things like “the fielder impeded the runners progress prior to having possession of the ball” instead of “she blocked the base”. Both sort of mean the same thing but the latter would allow the coach to then question if there was possession since the defense can block the base once they have possession of the ball.

Lastly, in your OP I agree you have to have the batter in the batting position prior to allowing the pitcher to assume the pitching position. With a batter runner (someone who has completed their turn at bat, but has not been putout) in the batter’s box as your OP described, the pitcher hasn’t assumed the pitching position yet, so the requirement of not throwing to the base while in contact with the pitching plate is not valid at this point. Again as someone else has pointed out, if you have a pitcher that doesn’t drag very far away from the pitching plate when they pitch and a hot shot comes up the middle that they knock down, step backward and have a foot in contact with the pitching plate as they throw to 1st to attempt to retire that batter runner, I don’t think anyone is going to ask you why you didn’t call an illegal pitch. This, in theory, is the same situation that you had in the OP. It’s not as easily seen since it appears there is a batter, and it appears the pitcher was in the pitching position and in contact with the pitching plate when she threw to 1st. But that’s why we make $250 a game because we can tell the difference :D

Well, you know, Tom, I just reread the thread and I'm still looking for that point.

I do not believe I was rude, I was talking to what I have been told is an experienced umpire who said she was here to learn, yet did more talking than listening.

Bull**** Mike......you seem to not be happy unless you are belittling someone.......I have known you since the rec.sports boards and McGriffs........I have called you out a few times when you have been wrong and you begrudgingly admitted your mistakes........

Personally.......I would have loved to have you as a UIC at one of my Regionals or Nationals as I know you could make me a better umpire........but I bet the guys I had were just as good............

I have always valued your insight......but you can be a bit harsh......I know I can be too at times, but you seem to go out of your way to crush new umpires on the internet.

As Wally Sparks once told me.......always stive to be better.

Joel

I am cranky as our night time lows have been around 79...........can anyone blame me.

If you say so, but then again, you want Peaches & Cream, call the John Butler Trio.

Never been a fan of Peaches & Cream, but if I were it would be Blue Bell.

Plain vanilla works for me.


Joel

Whooooooosh

(The sound of the last two posts going over my head):confused:

You have Blue Bell in Florida now Hugo.....at least in the panhandle. Been in your wonderful state a couple of times in the last year. It was nice to be able to get some good Tx ice cream........:cool:

Joel

I don't argue much, but when I do it is with Mike.

The Most Interesting Man in the World
http://blogington.com/wp-content/upl...-Equis-Man.jpg

Wrong picture, Tony.

Here's Mike Rowe
http://www.petapixel.com/assets/uplo...e_hagadone.jpg

Good, but over-rated.

Agreed. ;)

continuing with the digression

Speaking of Texas.... Asleep at the Wheel played at out town's Art Festival last week!! ahhhhhhhh haaaaaaaaaa

Yeah, they just played here two weeks ago. And to continue with the theme, Marcia Ball will visit over the summer

I wasn't posting a picture of Mike, it is what the world's most interesting man has to say...:cool:

You may be a rude SOB, nut you have great taste in Music!!
;)

You would be shocked......oh, and BTW, bite me :D j/k

:p

Yeah.....there are quite a few better ice creams out there. But for a reasonably priced product. It is hard to beat.

Joel

i never understood why softball went out of their way to add an extra step in describing the runners by using "RX is on Y base" when you could just use the baseball way and simply say "RX" where X is the base they are on. in case i didnt now write that well, why make the description of the runners longer and potentially more confusing. 1st and 3rd sounds a lot easy and better saying "R1 R3" than saying "R1 on thirdbase and R2 on firstbase"

By designating a player by the manner in which they participated in the game/inning you can have a continual scenario without changing a player's designation.

In baseball, if bases are loaded and each runner advances a base, R2 is now R3, R1 is R2 and the BR which was the B is now R1. In softball, B4 becomes a BR and then is R4. This indicates that R4 was the 4th batter of that inning and no matter what happens, will be designated by the "4" throughout the inning.

It also make sense that one comes before two, two comes before three, etc.

I find this much easier to follow when going through scenarios.

One hell of a performer, if you have never seen her. If you have, well, disregard my previous comment.

The argument over which is better is irrelevant. I didn't invent the softball nomenclature, and it is unlikely to change. Therefore, use it when discussing softball scenarios. To do otherwise disrespects the game and hints of elitism.

The way calling IP's was explained to me was:

Call what happens first.
hands together when stepping on the pitchers plate
stepping back
stepping forward
not dragging

I am sure there are others.

If they fix the first then don't fix the next then call that.

Here is the issue. There is no prescribed remedy to fix any of them that I can find. The mere described action is an IP. Nowhere does it state the IP is delayed pending possible correction.

I read that differently than you did. Call the first pitch illegal for the first thing that makes it illegal. If on the subsequent pitch, they fix the first thing, call the second thing. Etc.

Okay, I can see it reading that way and agree.