When do you finally step in?

[Buck912]

I have to also think that sometimes we might be looking at the phrase "overruling your partner" in the wrong sense. I don't necessarily see it that way. I think a lot of it has to do with the manner in which it's handled, but still with the emphasis on getting the call right. If we really want to get too hung up on the "overruling" term, we'd better realize that to some people, anytime we go to our partner asking for help after making a call, and that call is changed, it still could give the perception that our partner reversed or "overruled" the call. Notice, I said "could." What about when the plate umpire calls a ball on a checked swing, only to have the pitch called a strike by his base partner, on appeal. Sure, this is after an appeal, but in reality is his partner "overruling" his call? I don't think any of us look at it that way. I know this is a different situation but in the case of the checked swing, when the catcher or coach is shouting "check it", they're not asking us to go to our partner for help, they're telling us "check with your partner because I don't agree with that call." I know that some of the response to this will be that, in this instance, your partner is asking for your help, but I'm just trying to say if you deal with your partner in the right manner, we will eventually get the call right.....

[Panda Bear]

"blue" & "striker991" raise a good point about the 1st. scenario. My earlier post was a discussion in general, but I have to ask "greymule" what was done besides calling it fair? It was a deadball situation because it was called "foul". Did you treat it as a "no pitch"? With < 2 strikes, the foul is also a strike, so we have a batter that hit a fair ball assessed a strike for his trouble until you ruled it fair. So that could be removed, but no way any continuing action could stand.

[greymule]

We were lucky in the play in question. Both the offense and the defense played as if the ball had been called fair, so it was easy to see exactly where the runners would have been with the correct call.

However, had the batter stood dumbfounded at the plate and F7 let the ball roll to the fence, I guess there would have been nothing left to do but keep it as a foul ball.

As for judgment versus rule interpretation, I can see leaving judgment calls completely alone unless our partner asks for help. However, with a rule, we have to have some way of getting things right without simply announcing that our partner's ruling was in error. Certainly the argument that we may see that call again with the same team is a strong one.

And there are many ASA rules that ASA coaches, often men brought up on baseball (even in FP), don't know. How many ASA coaches know that if B4 bats instead of B3 and hits into a double play, the defense can appeal and get 3 outs? In baseball, if they appeal, it's one out and B4 bats again. And in Fed softball, it's two outs and B4 bats again.

Last year, in a tournament game between two very good SP teams, both packed with former baseball stars, R1 was hit by a fair smash while in contact with 1B. Both he and the defense started off the field thinking R1's being hit was the third out of the inning. We corrected the situation, but we could have called practically anything and those guys would have accepted it. The coach of the offense, who has managed good teams for 30 years, told me after the game that he had never heard that the runner was protected while on the base!

It's hard enough for us umps to remember every last detail of whatever association we're doing. We shouldn't trust coaches to keep us honest!

[oppool]

BY GREYMULE

And there are many ASA rules that ASA coaches, often men brought up on baseball (even in FP),don't know. How many ASA coaches know that if B4 bats instead of B3 and hits into a double play, the defense can appeal and get 3 outs? In baseball, if they appeal, it's one out and B4 bats again. And in Fed softball, it's two outs and B4 bats again.


Newby to FED ball but I thought the outs would remain and B3 would also be out and B4 starts off next inning just like ASA. Please correct me if I am wrong


Don

[greymule]

In Fed the defense gets an out for the batter who failed to bat when (s)he should have, plus outs for any runners put out during playing action. But in Fed the batter is not out (as in ASA).

[WestMichiganBlue]

In FED ball, when an improper batter completes her time at bat and a legal appeal is made - regardless of what she did - she is removed. If she was put out, the out is removed. If she is safe on base, she is removed from the base. (Its as though she did not exist.)

Then the proper batter (who failed to bat) is called out. The improper batter is returned to her correct place in the order. If she follows the proper batter (who is now out) then she bats again - fresh count. If she is two or more positions down in the order then she goes back to the dugout to await her turn.

All other outs on the play stand. In the above scenaro, if the first or second out of the double play was the improper batter, then her out is removed and there is no double play, just a single out. But the proper batter is called out, so you end up with two outs total.

If there were two runners on base that were put out (and the improper batter was safe), then the improper batter is removed and the double play stands. PLUS the proper batter is out. So you can get three outs on the play in FED ball.
WMB

[oppool]

appreciate the clarification and I think I've got it now


Don

[Steve M]

Don,
That's one of the differences between Fed & ASA. Several years ago, I put together a list of those differences - it's out of date now. But there is a John Bennett in Ca who has a handbook of differences amongst Fed, ASA, & NCAA that is pretty good. He's charging $7 this year. His email address is
[email protected]

Steve M

[Andy]

Originally posted by Striker991
Herein lies my confusion with the first post. I haven't been at this very long, but it has always been my opinion that "foul" was the one call that couldn't be reversed, because once called, the ball is dead and play is stopped. As someone else asked, where would you place the runners?

There was a very lengthy disucussion on this very topic on another discussion board last year. The scenario was that the ball landed past third base inside the foul line by three feet, obviously fair, and the umpire called foul ball.

My opinion is that once a foul ball is called, the ball is dead and we move on to the next pitch. Others felt that the umpire could use the "umpires may rule on any situation not specifically covered in the book" (the rule reference number escapes me) rule to place the runners where they would likely have ended up and play on.

Let's just say no consensus was reached!

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by Andy

There was a very lengthy disucussion on this very topic on another discussion board last year. The scenario was that the ball landed past third base inside the foul line by three feet, obviously fair, and the umpire called foul ball.

My opinion is that once a foul ball is called, the ball is dead and we move on to the next pitch. Others felt that the umpire could use the "umpires may rule on any situation not specifically covered in the book" (the rule reference number escapes me) rule to place the runners where they would likely have ended up and play on.

Let's just say no consensus was reached!

Yeah, I love that one. How can (ASA Rule 10) apply when FOUL and FAIR along with the effects are clearly covered in the rule book?

Some people just like to make them up as they go along.

[blue]

One cannot use rule 10 and place the runners where he thinks the runners would have been in this situation. Once "foul ball" is called, the play is dead. To allow the umps to reverse the call to fair and place the runners where they think they should be, the umps would have to assume everyone would have been safe. The play is dead, and you go to the next pitch.
Reversing the foul ball to fair and placing runners is worse than the original call of miscalling a foul ball.

[Mike Walsh]

The "get it right" opinion seems to be leading, so I thought I'd weigh in on the other side.

In each of the 5 examples in the original post, his partner made rules interpretation errors that can be corrected. For the IFF, a runner who does not retouch after first touch by the fielder is subject to being out on appeal. If the umpire called the runner safe, there is time to get it right. It should start with a request for time by the coach. The interference calls and the foul/foul tip issue each result in a dead ball. At that time the coach should be asking for an explanation. The one-and-one award is also during a dead ball. The question comes down to process – how to get it right. The rules for all codes say we can never overrule our partner or offer help that is not asked for. The same rules provide for the right way to handle these cases. When the coach hears the explanation, he should explain to the umpire his understanding of the rule. If the umpire does not realize his mistake, the coach should protest the game. At that point, the umpire is supposed to call his partner in for a consultation. In each of the above scenarios, the guy who didn't make the call should have been asked. If he wasn’t because the coach didn’t know how to protest correctly, that’s not our problem.

To the coach who says, "You know that's wrong!" I would say, "You know who you need to talk to in order to make sure the call is right – go see the umpire who made the call!" If the coach doesn’t know his job, it’s no skin off my teeth. It does matter if the coaches don’t know the rules and accept your partner’s mistakes without question. But it only matters to them, not to us. In a discussion after the game, preferably over a cold one with fellow blues, I would defend my position by saying that I want the game called correctly, but I’m not the one out there that missed the opportunity to get it right. I want to help, but I will follow the rules in doing so.

As for the fair/foul changed call, I donÂ’t see how that could be made right. Once he called foul it was dead and there is no way to know what would have happened. (If everyone ignored the call and played, thatÂ’s different.) The biggest difference in this play is it is a judgment call and the others were rules interpretations. No way to get this right after the fact.

[greymule]

In rule interpretation, I'm thinking of plays in which my partner was so sure of himself that he would not listen to any entreaties from coaches to consult with the other ump (me). R1 returning to 1B after F6 catches line drive, F6 tries to double up R1 and throws ball into stands, BU gives R1 1B and 2B and refuses to check with PU because he's certain his award is correct. BU won't listen, so now the coaches, having tried proper channels, come to me.

PS. In that instance (years ago), BU's mistake was not excusable, but it was understandable. BU had done a lot of USSSA, and I think at one time they did award bases that way, at least for a certain period.

In cases of foul and fair, it seems to me that there are some "foul" calls that are not changeable, and some that are. Live balls where everybody stops at the call of "foul" pretty much have to be dead on the spot. But if B1 hits a liner off the fence two feet fair and pulls in with a double as PU calls it foul, to me that's different.

But it doesn't take much imagination to see where that will lead. What if PU calls an obviously fair ball foul, B1 pulls into 2B, and R1 gets thrown out at home? If the umps stick with the obviously incorrect call of "foul," they will take a lot of heat, but otherwise they leave themselves open to insoluble complications.

Guess we better get it right the first time.

[HighSchoolWhiteHat]

Fair or foul is an easy call.(well not easy but)

if the plate umpire called it a foul its a foul no matter what. (if hes wrong he has to eat it) runners go back and the batter has the foul counted to his count.

what was the base umpire doing watching the ball anyway? its not his call.

I also have a question on the dented bat issue, Is a dented bat allowed used in a NIF/ISF game as long as it passes thru the bat ring? In ASA if the bat is dented in any way its out, get rid of it because its not to be used in the game. small dent or large dent its out. If the player wants to complain that he spent $400.00 for that bat just last week, theres nothing I can do to help him, sorry.

Also by dent Im looking for a dent not a pin size mark.

thanks

[Del-Blue]

Highschoolwhitehat,

In ASA, if the dented bat passes through the bat ring it IS allowed.

Bob