The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Thu Feb 23, 2012, 10:16pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 1,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by umpire george View Post
Please give me definition of a quality throw.
One that is directed to a fielder at, or near, first base such that there is a reasonable expectation that the throw is catchable and that it would have recorded an out.

A throw that sails over the fielder, out of her reach, would not be considered as a "quality throw".
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Thu Feb 23, 2012, 10:29pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: NY
Posts: 128
xtreamump

I have to assume double first base, & I have to assume drop third strike F-2 is making the throw from foul territory. Assuming all of that the BR is helping the defense. Game Over.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 24, 2012, 01:26am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by xtreamump View Post
I have to assume double first base, & I have to assume drop third strike F-2 is making the throw from foul territory. Assuming all of that the BR is helping the defense. Game Over.

As my old sergeant said if wish to live long enough to see tomorrow you will assume nothing. That goes double for umpiring.

But if you wish to use assume logic then bend over and spread them because you are about to get your assumed.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 24, 2012, 11:08am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 1,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by xtreamump View Post
I have to assume double first base, & I have to assume drop third strike F-2 is making the throw from foul territory. Assuming all of that the BR is helping the defense. Game Over.
I take it that with all your assumptions you are assuming that this was not interference.

Then why "Game Over"?
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 24, 2012, 11:11am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by BretMan View Post
I take it that with all your assumptions you are assuming that this was not interference.

Then why "Game Over"?
The other assumption is the runner scoring from 3rd. I assume.
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT.
It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 24, 2012, 12:08pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by BretMan View Post
I take it that with all your assumptions you are assuming that this was not interference.

Then why "Game Over"?
Because the game winning run scored.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 24, 2012, 06:04pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 1,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder View Post
Because the game winning run scored.
I guess that the first post does imply that...which I had conveniently forgot about by the time I'd read through another twenty posts.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 24, 2012, 10:05pm
wife loves the goatee...
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: The Beach
Posts: 255
Making sure I'm clear...
The runner was "just running"... no waving or shouting etc &
The throw never touched the runner???
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 25, 2012, 08:24am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRJ1960 View Post
Making sure I'm clear...
The runner was "just running"... no waving or shouting etc &
The throw never touched the runner???
Either way, the BR would have hindered the receiving fielder.
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT.
It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 25, 2012, 11:15am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRJ1960 View Post
Making sure I'm clear...
The runner was "just running"... no waving or shouting etc &
The throw never touched the runner???
The play involves a running lane violation, not interefering with a thrown ball.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
3' running lane violation on BB? PSUchem Softball 51 Tue Nov 24, 2009 01:20pm
Running lane violation? David Emerling Baseball 25 Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:38am
Running lane grimjack5150 Softball 7 Sat May 10, 2008 10:51pm
ASA - running lane violation with a walk Dakota Softball 34 Thu Sep 25, 2003 09:57am
running lane violation Rachel Softball 4 Thu Jul 10, 2003 09:03pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:03am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1