Obstruction question

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

Has anyone ever seen a runner, standing on a base past the one they missed or left too soon, leave that base and calmly trot back to touch the one left too soon when time was called?

I've ruled on a lot of dead-ball appeals, and never once has a runner or their coach taken advantage of that part of the rule.

Sure, couple of times. Then again, that team was all, well almost all, umpires

[IRISHMAFIA]

Speaking ASA

Originally Posted by youngump

There's nothing to ignore. The look back rule does not require the runner to maintain contact with the bag.

Look at the two rules before the LBR (8.7.R & S).

It requires that the runner not leave the bag.

Now, define "leave". If you were speaking of an area or space, I would agree, but the "base" is a defined object. If the foot, hand, ponytail, whatever, looses contact, it left the base.

I'm not suggesting we start calling people out merely for shifting weight, moving feet, etc., but.....

Only during the pitch is contact required. That's in the pitching rule section.

Citations please.

[Crabby_Bob]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

Has anyone ever seen a runner, standing on a base past the one they missed or left too soon, leave that base and calmly trot back to touch the one left too soon when time was called?

I've ruled on a lot of dead-ball appeals, and never once has a runner or their coach taken advantage of that part of the rule.

Can't do this to fix a missed base in FED.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by HugoTafurst

...or why should she be granted time to be able to stand up (without losing contact with the base after sliding) for that matter?

Sounds like you and I agree on that philosophy. Unfortunately there are a lot of people who don't.

Guilty as charged. I just view it as a game management issue. Not granting the Time tends to make the umpire seem arrogant and could lead to unnecessary friction. If my calls have already pissed off a few folks, why add fuel to the fire?

Besides, how much time are you really saving by not granting Time? How significant are you affecting the flow of the game? To me, it does nothing. Chances are, there's already going to be a slight delay as the umpires get back into position, the next batter comes to the plate, etc. I honestly don't see how granting Time makes a difference when play is essentially over.

[Chess Ref]

Originally Posted by manny a

besides, how much time are you really saving by not granting time? How significant are you affecting the flow of the game? To me, it does nothing. Chances are, there's already going to be a slight delay as the umpires get back into position, the next batter comes to the plate, etc. I honestly don't see how granting time makes a difference when play is essentially over.

+ 1

[HugoTafurst]

Originally Posted by Manny A

Guilty as charged. I just view it as a game management issue. Not granting the Time tends to make the umpire seem arrogant and could lead to unnecessary friction. If my calls have already pissed off a few folks, why add fuel to the fire?

Besides, how much time are you really saving by not granting Time? How significant are you affecting the flow of the game? To me, it does nothing. Chances are, there's already going to be a slight delay as the umpires get back into position, the next batter comes to the plate, etc. I honestly don't see how granting Time makes a difference when play is essentially over.

Different strokes for different folks.

1) I probably could have left out the word "unfortunately".
2) I could have added that if there is a reason for a dead ball, I will give it (injury, even dirt down the pants or shirt, etc)
3)

If my calls have already pissed off a few folks, why add fuel to the fire?

I never piss anybody off with my calls

I'm not a hard ass about it, just in general, I don't grant time unless there is a reason.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by HugoTafurst

I never piss anybody off with my calls

I need to move where you live. Is it Pleasantville, FL?

[Andy]

Originally Posted by Manny A

Guilty as charged. I just view it as a game management issue. Not granting the Time tends to make the umpire seem arrogant and could lead to unnecessary friction. If my calls have already pissed off a few folks, why add fuel to the fire?

Besides, how much time are you really saving by not granting Time? How significant are you affecting the flow of the game? To me, it does nothing. Chances are, there's already going to be a slight delay as the umpires get back into position, the next batter comes to the plate, etc. I honestly don't see how granting Time makes a difference when play is essentially over.

In the case of the runner sliding into the base safely and the fielder holding the tag on her and neither one of them showing any urgency to proceed, I will call time and move on. I choose not to deal with the standoff.

I've not tried Hugo's suggestion of "Let's play ball"...I may give that a try and see how it works.

[HugoTafurst]

Originally Posted by Manny A

I need to move where you live. Is it Pleasantville, FL?

I lie a lot, too....

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Manny A

Besides, how much time are you really saving by not granting Time? How significant are you affecting the flow of the game? To me, it does nothing. Chances are, there's already going to be a slight delay as the umpires get back into position, the next batter comes to the plate, etc. I honestly don't see how granting Time makes a difference when play is essentially over.

It doesn't. For that matter, the game moves on quicker if you grant the time. There is no "flow" to the game as everything you mentioned is going to occur whether you suspend play or not. The only difference is that both umpires cannot prepare for the next play simultaneously as they could if they did not have to be alert to a possible LBR violation.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by Manny A

Guilty as charged. I just view it as a game management issue. Not granting the Time tends to make the umpire seem arrogant and could lead to unnecessary friction. If my calls have already pissed off a few folks, why add fuel to the fire?

Besides, how much time are you really saving by not granting Time? How significant are you affecting the flow of the game? To me, it does nothing. Chances are, there's already going to be a slight delay as the umpires get back into position, the next batter comes to the plate, etc. I honestly don't see how granting Time makes a difference when play is essentially over.

I hear you. I just disagree.

It isn't always about saving time. It also shouldn't always be about GAGA (Going Along to Get Along). If it is a time-honored philosophy of this game to keep the ball live in that case, then that is what is expected of me, that is what the coaches and players need to learn, and that is what I will do.

This has morphed from granting time to dust off (which I find absurd) to denying time when a silly tag is being held ad nauseum. No way the same issue.

Agree or disagree with the philosophy, if we are here for the game, we need to honor the game that way. Again, jmo.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

If it is a time-honored philosophy of this game to keep the ball live in that case, then that is what is expected of me, that is what the coaches and players need to learn, and that is what I will do.

WARNING! You are about to encounter a personal opinion. Do not be alarmed, you are still permitted to retain your own opinion...................at least, for now!!!!

The only reason this is considered a "live ball" game is because the traditionalist insist on calling that so they can be more like baseball for girls, which as we all know, it isn't.

Same reason people consistently refer to the circle and pitcher's plate as the mound and rubber. The same way they refer to leaving the base as a "lead". The same way some (including NCAA) still refer to an IP as a balk. Talk about GAGA!

People want a game of their own, but either cannot or will not let go of the other. It's time softball people cut the apron strings and move on.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

WARNING! You are about to encounter a personal opinion. Do not be alarmed, you are still permitted to retain your own opinion...................at least, for now!!!!

The only reason this is considered a "live ball" game is because the traditionalist insist on calling that so they can be more like baseball for girls, which as we all know, it isn't.

Same reason people consistently refer to the circle and pitcher's plate as the mound and rubber. The same way they refer to leaving the base as a "lead". The same way some (including NCAA) still refer to an IP as a balk. Talk about GAGA!

People want a game of their own, but either cannot or will not let go of the other. It's time softball people cut the apron strings and move on.

Color me something other than shocked.

Not our first conversation on the topic; but we both know that, until the rules and philosophy behind the rules change, we are expected to do it that way (keep the ball live). And we will likely discuss again (any time we are in the same area that sells beer!!).

Our opinions aside, honor the game, not what you think the game should be.

[Insane Blue]

I have been told time and time again that we should call time out in stalemate situations ie.. tag held on a runner who is laid out. The theory is that you will speed the game up unlike Baseball where it slows it down due to lead offs and so on.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Insane Blue

I have been told time and time again that we should call time out in stalemate situations ie.. tag held on a runner who is laid out. The theory is that you will speed the game up unlike Baseball where it slows it down due to lead offs and so on.

I think most agree with you. Assuming no other action anywhere else, if a runner is just laying there and the knucklehead fielder is just sitting there with the tag in place - kill it.

But when you have a team that is coached to ask for time every time they slide safely even when the fielder's doing nothing - don't kill it.