Originally Posted by Andy (Post 846765)

In reading the published info once again, I see that the subject is "game control" and it speaks about trying to prevent situations before they happen.

The example given is the one that is being discussed here. In the context of the entire article, I think I see the point.

If the batter is truly confused and takes off for first on ball 3, and the runners advance because they see the batter moving toward first, then the advice is to kill the play and reset. The issue I have with this is that it puts the umpire on the field back in the position of judging intent of the player as opposed to the actions of the player. If you have been around long enough, you will run into players and coaches that try this type of thing (intentionally running to first on ball 3) to create confusion and try to gain a "cheap" base.

Up until now, we have taken the position that the onus is on the game participants to know the situation and react accordingly and if a team can create confusion, yeah, it may be bush league, but it is within the rules and we rule on what happens on the field. How many times on this and other similar forums have we chastised some umpires for making up a ruling to "keep it fair" and stop what they considered to be a bush league type play?

I do like the topic of game control and game management and think it is something that all levels of umpires can benefit from. However, I don't think using this particular example fits with the topic.

Originally Posted by tcannizzo (Post 846782)

WOW! What a poor choice of words. Very non-specific and wildly open to interpretation, or even not clearly understood.

The player who is "to bat last this inning" is the one who is up when the game-winning run is scored. How does coach know who that will be?
Heck, if they are Vis, and they score 12 runs, how does coach know that right now?

So then, coach interprets that to mean the B9 belongs on 2B because the umpires said so, or at least thought so. You then call BOO and coach says, but you told me to put her there!!!! Now what do you do?

.

Originally Posted by DaveASA/FED (Post 846851)

2012 ASA book RUle 5 section 11 A says "Starting with the top of the eighth inning, and each half inning thereafter, the offensive team shall begin its turn at bat with the player who is scheduled to bat last in that respective half inning being placed on second base (e.g., if the number five batter is the lead off batter, the number four batter in the batting order will be placed on second base. A substitute may be inserted for the runner)."

Seems to me the umpire is giving them by the book advice. Your point is taken however, it is a good idea to not end the conversation there but to make sure that they agree who the lead off is and the person they send to 2B is listed one position above them in the lineup.

Originally Posted by Softball910 (Post 846733)

Good day fellow officials. I have been following this and other forums for the last 5 years but have not joined any until now. I have witnessed (read) posters degrading, belittling, disrespecting...each other, and for some strange reason half reading, omitting, over looking, not paying attention to...what fellow officials write in their post. Then comes the replies/remarks that baffle anyone that (a) picks up a rule/mechanics/case book and actually tries to learn what is in it, and (b)has actually been on a ball field applied these rules/mechanics and dealt with directors, coaches, parents and players.

True, someone sitting behind a desk somewhere in ASA has come up with something unrealistic. We that get on the field know if we start protecting players in even half of the instances that their brain shuts down, and they without the right to step off of a base do so, we will be dealing with the other teams coaches having to explain why we stopped their team from having the opportunity to get an out, or score a run(many a defense have tossed the ball and headed for the dugout thinking there was 2 outs -do we call "time" and protect aginst the ensuing chaos here also). I was tempted to reply to my state ASA UIC and just suggest that he ensure ALL of the coaches in the state get this "clarification" and be ok with it, since it has been put out as direction for ASA umpires.

Back to my opening, enough with the name calling fellow officials, Irish Mafia had good points in his post, and he had the answer to the "time" situation that I myself use, just loudly give the count, or the outs, that usually re-engages all of the brains(players, coaches, parents and fellow officials)that may have momentarily shut down. I hope ASA revisits this and gives different "clarification".

Originally Posted by youngump (Post 846857)

I'm not sure I've ever been trained on this, so maybe this is wrong, but here's what I've done / seen done the few times I've done tie breakers. At the end of the last tied inning the HP umpire walks up the scorekeeper and finds out who should be up. He tells the coach to send that player out to second. The BU is on the correct line to make sure the runner doesn't go out until warm ups are done.

Originally Posted by youngump (Post 846857)

At the end of the last tied inning the HP umpire walks up the scorekeeper and finds out who should be up. He tells the coach to send that player out to second.

Originally Posted by rwest (Post 846872)

Except it is not that player who should be placed on 2nd. The player who "should be up" is the lead off. The player that is in front of that player is the one placed on 2nd.

Originally Posted by CecilOne (Post 846875)

I'm pretty sure, that is what he meant, using "who is up" as a tool to find a spot in the lineup.
Also, SWP, if the leadoff is up, the TB runner is not the FLEX.

Originally Posted by LIUmp (Post 847105)

In which instances is the batter what is scheduled to bat last in the inning different from the "last batted out"? I have umpires in my organization who explain to the coaches that last batted out should go to second base. I tell them it's not last batted out, it's player scheduled to bat last in the inning. They say "same difference". I cringe.

How do I effectively explain the difference to these numbskulls?

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve (Post 847108)

One of many examples.

B1 put out, B2 put out. B3 walks. B4 walks. B5 walks. With B6 at bat, any one of the 3 runners is picked off, or R3 out at plate attempting to advance on passed ball.

By the rule, B6 is first batter in next inning, B5 placed on base. "Last batted out" (a term that doesn't exist) was B2; clearly the wrong runner.

Or, just about any play that is a fielder's choice for the 3rd out, or any advance runner thrown out; the last batter wasn't put out, so wouldn't be the runner by those claiming "same difference".

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA (Post 847124)

Here is how I explain it.

Pull out your well-maintained line up card and locate the batter scheduled to lead off that half an inning. Now, look at the name of the player in the batting order slot immediately above. That player, or legal substitute or legal courtesy runner, it the player placed on 2nd base to start the inning.

Originally Posted by LIUmp (Post 847132)

Can you place a courtesy runner on 2nd for the start of that inning, considering the F1 or F2 didn't technically bat to earn their way on 2nd?