Running lane vs base path

[BretMan]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

As a general comment, I think that too many umpires go onto the field to prove all the rules that they know. They forget to recognize that sometimes things just happen and that's part of the game. The rule book has to be a part of the game without taking the game out of the game.

Personally, I'd prefer that the umpire did know the rule and prove it by not calling interference on this play.

And there are rules that cover this. I'm kind of scratching my head thinking of any routine plays that aren't covered by a rule that an umpire needs to know and know how to apply it.

What are examples of plays that are "just part of the game"...but not covered by an applicable rule?

[DeputyUICHousto]

Originally Posted by BretMan

Personally, I'd prefer that the umpire did know the rule and prove it by not calling interference on this play.

And there are rules that cover this. I'm kind of scratching my head thinking of any routine plays that aren't covered by a rule that an umpire needs to know and know how to apply it.

What are examples of plays that are "just part of the game"...but not covered by an applicable rule?

how about having a dog run onto the field during a live ball and picking up the ball in its mouth and running away? What rule is this "play" covered under. LOL.

[okla21fan]

Originally Posted by DeputyUICHousto

how about having a dog run onto the field during a live ball and picking up the ball in its mouth and running away? What rule is this "play" covered under. LOL.

simple.... thats a block ball, and book rule applies. (you guys play too much USFA down there in Houston and clouds your vision)

[Crabby_Bob]

Originally Posted by okla21fan

simple.... thats a block ball, and book rule applies. (you guys play too much USFA down there in Houston and clouds your vision)

Why not spectator interference and award bases as appropriate? (This is not an example of something not covered by the rules.)

[Tru_in_Blu]

Wondering ducks?

Makes one take pause.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by tru_in_blu

wondering ducks?

Makes one take pause.

:d :d :d :d

[BretMan]

Originally Posted by DeputyUICHousto

how about having a dog run onto the field during a live ball and picking up the ball in its mouth and running away? What rule is this "play" covered under. LOL.

There's a reason I used the phrase "routine plays" in my post.

By the way...routine or not...I have actually seen this happen before! Just once in 40 years of being around baseball and softball, but it did happen. There was a twist, though. A batted ball was rolling along the first base foul line and hadn't reached the bag yet, when a bulldog broke his leash, ran from the stands and grabbed the ball. It was still a live ball, but he grabbed it over foul ground so it became foul and dead the instant he touched it. So, as strange as this was...there was a rule to cover it- the usual foul ball rules.

It actually took three or four minutes of chasing the dog around the field to get the ball. The dog was having a great time! Then, once things finally got settled down, the pitcher retrieved the ball and got ready for the next pitch. He gets ready to pitch, then suddenly asks for time. The umpire already seemed to be kind of ticked off about the game delay, so he grumbled, "What is it now?".

The pitcher gingerly held the ball up with two fingers and said, "Can I get a new ball? This one is covered in dog slobber".

[HugoTafurst]

Originally Posted by DeputyUICHousto

how about having a dog run onto the field during a live ball and picking up the ball in its mouth and running away? What rule is this "play" covered under. LOL.

And then there is the ball that hits a duck that has wondered onto the field -

Easy call.......

[MD Longhorn]

I believe I've only seen interference properly called ONCE (in 18 years) on a retreating runner with her back to the ball. As she was diving for the base her hands were in the air, and she blatantly and obviously swung them down at the fielder's glove preventing her from making the catch. (This was back when ATR was valid).

[HugoTafurst]

Originally Posted by HugoTafurst

And then there is the ball that hits a duck that has wondered onto the field -

Easy call.......

24 hours later and no one came up with the call?

[BretMan]

Fowl ball...

[EsqUmp]

Originally Posted by BretMan

Personally, I'd prefer that the umpire did know the rule and prove it by not calling interference on this play.

And there are rules that cover this. I'm kind of scratching my head thinking of any routine plays that aren't covered by a rule that an umpire needs to know and know how to apply it.

What are examples of plays that are "just part of the game"...but not covered by an applicable rule?

My point was that it's often as important to know when not to make a call as it is to make a call. I find that many umpires appear to try to make rules apply to a situation to make an actual call (as opposed to a non-call).

Of course, you would have to know the rules and know not to invoke a rule that isn't applicable.

A "wreck" as defined in the rule book is an example.

[txtrooper]

Did the Duck belong to the offense or defensive team?

[Az.Ump]

The duck would have to have a first and last name listed on the line up card otherwise it would be an illegal duck. It would also need a NOCSAE stamp on its bill and be unaltered. Heating the duck could mean your goose is cooked. This can all be confirmed "adducked" section of the rule book.

Paul

[txtrooper]

Originally Posted by Az.Ump

The duck would have to have a first and last name listed on the line up card otherwise it would be an illegal duck. It would also need a NOCSAE stamp on its bill and be unaltered. Heating the duck could mean your goose is cooked. This can all be confirmed "adducked" section of the rule book.

Paul

Now that's funny, I don't care who you are!