Not Your Everyday Play

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

I understand that. NCAA, Referee Magazine and PONY (they are clearing up the book) use it the way I worded it. Since I deal with those organizations more, I use their terminology.

I've not read all of the PONY rules, but the sections I visited in the rule book use the terminology in the order Irish mentions: R1 is most advanced runner, R2 is behind her, etc.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

I understand that. NCAA, Referee Magazine and PONY (they are clearing up the book) use it the way I worded it. Since I deal with those organizations more, I use their terminology.

And this play from Referee is why I think the terminology is ludicrous:

1. R3 is on third base and R2 is on second when B4 hits a ground ball to F6. While running to third, R2 inadvertently hinders F6 who is fielding the ball. At the time of the hindrance, R3 has not reached the plate.

To go with a Sheldonism, "In what universe is there any order which runs, 3, 2, 4?" What happened to "1"?

The softball method also allows for continuity in extended and continuations of any scenario(s). The baseball method is a one and done and a complete reset.

And that is my personal preference.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

I've not read all of the PONY rules, but the sections I visited in the rule book use the terminology in the order Irish mentions: R1 is most advanced runner, R2 is behind her, etc.

Here you go. I think you can go to Page 39 for examples.

2012 PONY Girls Softball Rule Book (English Version)

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

And this play from Referee is why I think the terminology is ludicrous:

1. R3 is on third base and R2 is on second when B4 hits a ground ball to F6. While running to third, R2 inadvertently hinders F6 who is fielding the ball. At the time of the hindrance, R3 has not reached the plate.

To go with a Sheldonism, "In what universe is there any order which runs, 3, 2, 4?" What happened to "1"?

The softball method also allows for continuity in extended and continuations of any scenario(s). The baseball method is a one and done and a complete reset.

And that is my personal preference.

*knock* *knock* *knock* Irish...

*knock* *knock* *knock* Irish...

*knock* *knock* *knock* Irish...

*knock* *knock* *knock* Irish...

*knock* *knock* *knock* Irish...

*knock* *knock* *knock* Irish...

I will say this, though... At least EsqUmp specified in his post which runners were which. Too often, people assume that everyone knows on which base R3 had started.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

I understand that. NCAA, Referee Magazine and PONY (they are clearing up the book) use it the way I worded it. Since I deal with those organizations more, I use their terminology.

Not my book (not sure what "clearing up the book" means - but I see zero references to the runners in baseball-order.)

PS - Referee Magazine's reputation on this site is BARELY ahead of Joe Morgan or Lisa Hernandez. Would recommend not using them as a source for anything.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

*knock* *knock* *knock* Irish...

*knock* *knock* *knock* Irish...

*knock* *knock* *knock* Irish...

*knock* *knock* *knock* Irish...

*knock* *knock* *knock* Irish...

*knock* *knock* *knock* Irish...

Bazinga!

[jmkupka]

Please help me if I'm missing something, but wouldn't this be the cousin of the IF? An intentional drop, dead ball, runners return.
Seems by the reaction of F6, here was an opportunity for a DP...

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

Please help me if I'm missing something, but wouldn't this be the cousin of the IF? An intentional drop, dead ball, runners return.
Seems by the reaction of F6, here was an opportunity for a DP...

It was a line drive, according to the OP, and not an intentional drop (and PU was clear in his call).

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

*knock* *knock* *knock* Irish...

*knock* *knock* *knock* Irish...

*knock* *knock* *knock* Irish...

*knock* *knock* *knock* Irish...

*knock* *knock* *knock* Irish...

*knock* *knock* *knock* Irish...

I will say this, though... At least EsqUmp specified in his post which runners were which. Too often, people assume that everyone knows on which base R3 had started.

Which is exactly how it is done. Ever try to teach mechanics by running continuous play scenario and changing the designation of each runner after each event? I'll stick with 1 being 1 from the plate to the plate, thank you very much.

[EsqUmp]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Not my book (not sure what "clearing up the book" means - but I see zero references to the runners in baseball-order.)

PS - Referee Magazine's reputation on this site is BARELY ahead of Joe Morgan or Lisa Hernandez. Would recommend not using them as a source for anything.

"Cleaning up" means they had a lot of grammatical errors, formatting errors and too many inconsistencies. Most of them are being addressed.

[x-tremeump]

A little bit Muddy, 1 means 1, & 2 is 2nd ?

[EsqUmp]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Which is exactly how it is done. Ever try to teach mechanics by running continuous play scenario and changing the designation of each runner after each event? I'll stick with 1 being 1 from the plate to the plate, thank you very much.

When you have a post, you're more than welcome to do that.

[EsqUmp]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Not my book (not sure what "clearing up the book" means - but I see zero references to the runners in baseball-order.)

PS - Referee Magazine's reputation on this site is BARELY ahead of Joe Morgan or Lisa Hernandez. Would recommend not using them as a source for anything.

There are a lot of good ideas and articles in Referee. Not just for softball and baseball, but other sports and other general issues as well. While I don't agree with everything they write, nor what anyone else rights, there's a lot to consider. I wouldn't put blinders on just because it wasn't the way I was necessarily trained. John Bennett, you many on this forum, including myself, hold in high regard, often writes for them.

I would concur with your opinion of Joe Morgan and Lisa Fernandez though. They are almost as bad as Joe Buck and Tim McCarver.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

When you have a post, you're more than welcome to do that.

No offense, but I think you're missing the point. For consistency's sake, this board uses Softball nomenclature for their runners - R1 for the lead, R2 after that etc. Your posts are going to be more easily followed and responded to if you can also follow the same nomenclature. (btw - the exact opposite is true over on the baseball board - but their reaction to someone using softball nomenclature on that board is a LOT more negative and vitriol-filled than what you got here).

If you use the wrong shorthand, some of your responses will use "your" shorthand, and others will use softball shorthand, and confusion and chaos will set in. We've all seen it - a lot. This is why you're being asked to use typical softball shorthand.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

There are a lot of good ideas and articles in Referee. Not just for softball and baseball, but other sports and other general issues as well. While I don't agree with everything they write, nor what anyone else rights, there's a lot to consider. I wouldn't put blinders on just because it wasn't the way I was necessarily trained. John Bennett, you many on this forum, including myself, hold in high regard, often writes for them.

I would concur with your opinion of Joe Morgan and Lisa Fernandez though. They are almost as bad as Joe Buck and Tim McCarver.

I understand - and will agree there are good articles on occasion (their football stuff is generally FAR better than their softball and baseball stuff) - but they often (far too often for an umpire's taste) simply get rules or plays wrong. They used to have an Ask the Umpire feature which was wrong more often than it was right. I would say one thing ... if they say one thing and ANY other reputable source says something else, it's at least 10-1 that the other source is right.