ASA Play

[youngump]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

ASA scaled back the language of Rule 10 (without any note as to why) a few years ago. There was a time when Rule 10 stated that no umpire shall impose a penalty for a violation of the offending team would benefit from the imposing that violation. In this case, imposing a penalty (the penalty for catcher's obstruction), would benefit the offending team. There is at least an argument that the penalty should not be imposed at all. That protective rule seems to have escaped the newer rule books though.

Without regard to what everyone else is telling you, which you should listen to, you're also wrong on this. Since the ball became dead as soon as the violation occurred not imposing the penalty would involve returning the runner to first. Once the dead ball bell rings, you can't unring it to see what happened after it became dead (at least as far as live ball action is concerned).

[EsqUmp]

Originally Posted by youngump

Without regard to what everyone else is telling you, which you should listen to, you're also wrong on this. Since the ball became dead as soon as the violation occurred not imposing the penalty would involve returning the runner to first. Once the dead ball bell rings, you can't unring it to see what happened after it became dead (at least as far as live ball action is concerned).

I threw that out there for consideration. It's a rule that is often overlooked. The play wasn't overly specific. We don't know what the umpires actually called. It is something to at least contemplate depending on the play that developed. If a "normal" catcher's obstruction took place, this could come into play.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

If you meant 8-1-D-3, then you bring up something I overlooked - the play should've been dead from the moment the catcher crossed home plate to hinder the batter.

That's the part I think may need to be adjusted. Don't understand why this would need to be a dead ball.

But if it is going to be a dead ball, I like the NCAA's effect which awards a base to all runners, not just those forced. That would account for any OBS where a runner not forced being returned to a base if attempting to steal on the play and the special rule (8.1.D.4) for CO in an attempted squeeze play.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

That's the part I think may need to be adjusted. Don't understand why this would need to be a dead ball.

But if it is going to be a dead ball, I like the NCAA's effect which awards a base to all runners, not just those forced. That would account for any OBS where a runner not forced being returned to a base if attempting to steal on the play and the special rule (8.1.D.4) for CO in an attempted squeeze play.

I agree. I see no reason why we shouldn't let this play out (once the rule changes, of course). Runners can certainly still score, and the coach may choose the result of the play rather than take the award. Just seems to make the most sense (thus, my initial answer).

[x-tremeump]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

And you should read all responses, including my followup in which I stated that I'd mistakenly overlooked this component.

I don't care about the length of your responses. I do, however, worry about your attitude towards the regulars here.

The regulars on here are mabee wrong sometimes ? Change is good.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by xtreamump

The regulars on here are mabee wrong sometimes ? Change is good.

so is spell check

[x-tremeump]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

so is spell check

All of your posts, I agree with this one.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by xtreamump

The regulars on here are mabee wrong sometimes ? Change is good.

It happens, but it's extremely rare. Stick around, and you'll see.