Illegal pitch or no pitch.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Manny A

JMO, but unless it's blatantly obvious that the runner left her base well before the pitcher aborted her delivery, I'm giving the runner the benefit of the doubt here. Since the two of you couldn't figure out what came first, then the IP violation should prevail.

Absolutely - I agree completely.

That said ... it's one or the other. The ruling of NOTHING that the OP went with is the only possible wrong answer here.

[EsqUmp]

Illegal pitch = delayed dead ball.

Runner leaving early = dead ball.

Illegal pitch occurred first. Offense gets the choice of the result of the play or enforcement of the illegal pitch penalty (because not all runners safely advanced).

I assume the offense will take the penalty (ball on batter and runner gets a base).

I don't know why people keep trying to complicate these plays.

[UmpireErnie]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

Illegal pitch = delayed dead ball.

Runner leaving early = dead ball.

Illegal pitch occurred first. Offense gets the choice of the result of the play or enforcement of the illegal pitch penalty (because not all runners safely advanced).

I assume the offense will take the penalty (ball on batter and runner gets a base).

I don't know why people keep trying to complicate these plays.

At the risk of being one of those "people"

The IP being discussed here is F1 failing to deliver the ball after separating the hands. If R1 leaves early, say after the hands separate but clearly before F1 falls to the ground without releasing the ball then didn't the offensive infraction come first? And since leaving early is immediate dead ball the IP never happens....

[RKBUmp]

I believe both ASA and FED have rules clarifications or case plays which state if you have both an illegal pitch such as a pitcher double touching and a runner leaving early, you enforce both infractions.

But, agree with other posts, if the illegal pitch is what caused the runner to leave early because the pitcher never released the ball, I would not call the leaving early and only enforce the illegal pitch.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by RKBUmp

I believe both ASA and FED have rules clarifications or case plays which state if you have both an illegal pitch such as a pitcher double touching and a runner leaving early, you enforce both infractions.

But, agree with other posts, if the illegal pitch is what caused the runner to leave early because the pitcher never released the ball, I would not call the leaving early and only enforce the illegal pitch.

Ding, ding, ding!!!

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by UmpireErnie

At the risk of being one of those "people"

The IP being discussed here is F1 failing to deliver the ball after separating the hands. If R1 leaves early, say after the hands separate but clearly before F1 falls to the ground without releasing the ball then didn't the offensive infraction come first? And since leaving early is immediate dead ball the IP never happens....

Yes. But that's not what happened as described in the OP. The umpires couldn't figure out when the runner left the bag in relation to the failed pitch.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Manny A

The umpires couldn't figure out when the runner left the bag in relation to the failed pitch.

True... but that's the umpire's job. I think it's clear the majority here are saying that if in doubt - it's an IP. It's definitely not both or neither, and the solution the umpires on the field actually came up with is the only possible wrong solution here.

Saying they couldn't figure out what happened first is the equivalent of trying to call a tie on a play at first base. It's their JOB to decide which happened first. Sometimes you just have to umpire.

[chapmaja]

One thing to consider on this issue. This was my first game back umpiring in about 8 years, after only working a few games before.

I was just wondering how it should be handled. Now, I would have called the IP and would not be as timid as to let the BU dictate what happened. I have worked several sports with that person, and I can't say it has been much fun in any sport.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

One thing to consider on this issue. This was my first game back umpiring in about 8 years, after only working a few games before.

I was just wondering how it should be handled. Now, I would have called the IP and would not be as timid as to let the BU dictate what happened. I have worked several sports with that person, and I can't say it has been much fun in any sport.

Cool. And we ALL love working with "that guy". I think you got your answer --- probably IP and ignore the LE; although if the LE was obviously first you'd go with that. Just not neither next time.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

True... but that's the umpire's job. I think it's clear the majority here are saying that if in doubt - it's an IP. It's definitely not both or neither, and the solution the umpires on the field actually came up with is the only possible wrong solution here.

Saying they couldn't figure out what happened first is the equivalent of trying to call a tie on a play at first base. It's their JOB to decide which happened first. Sometimes you just have to umpire.

Completely agree with you. There have been times where my partner and I could not definitively decide what actually happened on a play. But we always resolve it by making a rulebook decision, not come up with a made-up compromise that essentially benefits both teams.