The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 31, 2013, 11:49am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Glendale, AZ
Posts: 2,672
From another board

Take a look at this thread and video and tell us what you think:

how would you ruled this? - Page 2
__________________
It's what you learn after you think you know it all that's important!
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 31, 2013, 03:03pm
Call it as I see it.
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: So.Cal
Posts: 327
Here is a direct link to the Video http://www.leaguelineup.com/miscinfo...&sid=170225371

The Batter of course is out.
The question then becomes did a retired player interfere with the play?

I am going to say no she did not as she was doing what she is supposed to do (run to 1st) when you hit the ball. She looks back saw she was out and stopped running. She is clearly in foul territory and did not intentionally interfere.
__________________
"I couldn't see well enough to play when I was a boy, so they gave me a special job - they made me an umpire." - President of the United States Harry S. Truman
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 31, 2013, 04:40pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 52
Send a message via AIM to bluejay Send a message via Yahoo to bluejay
The PU looks kind of dumb founded. Perhaps he did not agree with BU call. I would certainly want to know how that could be BU call when it happened right in front of PU. IMHO there is no way the retired runner committed interference in this case.
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Tue Dec 31, 2013, 05:27pm
wife loves the goatee...
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: The Beach
Posts: 255
Post this when people are paying attention and grab the popcorn.....
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 01, 2014, 08:51pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Speaking ASA

This is a lousy call. The retired BR did not commit an act of interference.
There really isn't anything to debate, it was an umpire either being talked into a call or doesn't know the rule.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 02, 2014, 01:40am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 372
not just dumbfounded, but just plain dumb.

he might was well have held up a sign inviting everyone and wrote on his forehead that the crew is divided.

he can has plenty of opportunity to discuss in postgame with his partner.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluejay View Post
The PU looks kind of dumb founded. Perhaps he did not agree with BU call. I would certainly want to know how that could be BU call when it happened right in front of PU. IMHO there is no way the retired runner committed interference in this case.
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 02, 2014, 06:40am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by shagpal View Post
not just dumbfounded, but just plain dumb.

he might was well have held up a sign inviting everyone and wrote on his forehead that the crew is divided.

he can has plenty of opportunity to discuss in postgame with his partner.
How do you know what he "looked" like?

What would you expect him to do, run out in the field waving his arms, screaming "no, no, no, live ball"?

Don't see either umpire killing the play, just the BU making a ruling on a play that, if you want to prioritize, wasn't his to make.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 02, 2014, 09:44am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Interference on this play is not just a bad call but possibly even a rules mistake on the part of BU. I think, as PU, this warrants at least a bit of discussion to make sure it's horribly bad judgement (and thus unfixable) rather than a rules misunderstanding on his part (and thus necessarily fixable).
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 02, 2014, 09:59am
Stirrer of the Pot
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Lowcountry, SC
Posts: 2,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by Insane Blue View Post
The question then becomes did a retired player interfere with the play?

I am going to say no she did not as she was doing what she is supposed to do...
{Cringe}

Be careful here. A runner (or fielder, for that matter) can easily interfere (or obstruct) by "doing what she is supposed to". There are many examples, such as when a runner going straight to her next base collides with a fielder fielding the ball, or when a fielder moves into the path of the runner while trying to catch an off-line throw.

I would recommend not to use that line when justifying a call with a coach.
__________________
"Let's face it. Umpiring is not an easy or happy way to make a living. In the abuse they suffer, and the pay they get for it, you see an imbalance that can only be explained by their need to stay close to a game they can't resist." -- Bob Uecker
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 02, 2014, 01:06pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 372
its in the video.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA View Post
How do you know what he "looked" like?

What would you expect him to do, run out in the field waving his arms, screaming "no, no, no, live ball"?

Don't see either umpire killing the play, just the BU making a ruling on a play that, if you want to prioritize, wasn't his to make.
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 02, 2014, 01:57pm
Call it as I see it.
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: So.Cal
Posts: 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manny A View Post
{Cringe}

Be careful here. A runner (or fielder, for that matter) can easily interfere (or obstruct) by "doing what she is supposed to".
There are many examples, such as when a runner going straight to her next base collides with a fielder fielding the ball,
The fielder is doing what she is SUPPOSED to do the runner is not. (The Runner is supposed to avoid the contact on this play if they do not the they are not doing what they are SUPPOSED to do they are INTERFERING.)

Quote:
or when a fielder moves into the path of the runner while trying to catch an off-line throw.
The fielder is doing what they are supposed to do unless this act hinders the runner. ( If the throw gets their first nothing is wrong. The fielder must avoid hindering the runner with out the ball or they are guilty of OBSTRUCTION).

Quote:
I would recommend not to use that line when justifying a call with a coach.
IF this play was not called and a coach came out to question interference on the play, my response to a coach would be in my judgment is no interference as the Batter-Runner did what she is SUPPOSED TO BY BOOK RULE.

Come on Manny get real we do not need to answer every Question here like talking to a coach unless asked how should we answer the coach!!!
__________________
"I couldn't see well enough to play when I was a boy, so they gave me a special job - they made me an umpire." - President of the United States Harry S. Truman
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 02, 2014, 02:19pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by Insane Blue View Post
IF this play was not called and a coach came out to question interference on the play, my response to a coach would be in my judgment is no interference as the Batter-Runner did what she is SUPPOSED TO BY BOOK RULE.

Come on Manny get real we do not need to answer every Question here like talking to a coach unless asked how should we answer the coach!!!
Ugh. I hope you're never my umpire. I'd insist that you show me where the "book rule" (your words) defines what the batter-runner is "supposed to" do. I'd also insist that you look up the definition of batter-runner, as this player is not one at that point.

"Coach, she was doing what she's supposed to be doing" is NEVER the right answer. And it is never an explanation (even to other umpires) of why a particular call is correct.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 02, 2014, 02:48pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 372
you would instigate a discussion on the field?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn View Post
Interference on this play is not just a bad call but possibly even a rules mistake on the part of BU. I think, as PU, this warrants at least a bit of discussion to make sure it's horribly bad judgement (and thus unfixable) rather than a rules misunderstanding on his part (and thus necessarily fixable).
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 02, 2014, 02:58pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by shagpal View Post
you would instigate a discussion on the field?
Instigate?

I don't think that word means what you think it does.

Initiate? Depending on partner, yes. If there's any likelihood partner's decision is a rules error, we have an obligation to see it fixed. If I don't know partner, or if partner is someone I know to be new, I'm absolutely INITIATING ( ) a conversation with him to ask him if his decision is correct by rule. This (potentially at least) is equivalent to partner ruling someone out on IFF with 2 outs. We fix rule errors if we know a rule error has been made. We're required to.

OTOH, if this is a partner that I know to be knowledgable on the rules, I let it lie and ask him afterward why he made the ruling he made (and why he was fishing in my pond). Until then (unless asked by partner), I assume he saw something from his angle that I did not from mine that made him make this call.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 02, 2014, 03:09pm
Call it as I see it.
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: So.Cal
Posts: 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn View Post
Ugh. I hope you're never my umpire. I'd insist that you show me where the "book rule" (your words) defines what the batter-runner is "supposed to" do. I'd also insist that you look up the definition of batter-runner, as this player is not one at that point.

"Coach, she was doing what she's supposed to be doing" is NEVER the right answer. And it is never an explanation (even to other umpires) of why a particular call is correct.
Mike You are correct at the time of the throw she is a retired runner.

Rule 8-7-p
Interference by a retired runner.

When, after being declared out or after scoring, an offensive player interferes with a defensive player’s opportunity to make a play on another runner.
EFFECT: The ball is dead. The runner closest to home plate at the time of the
interference is out. All runners not out must return to the last base touched
at the time of the interference.

Rule Supplement 33.
INTERFERENCE.

Interference is the act of an offensive player or team member that impedes,
hinders or confuses a defensive player attempting to execute a play.
Interference may be in the form of physical contact, verbal distraction, visual
distraction, or any type of distraction that hinders a fielder in the execution
of a play. Defensive players must be given the opportunity to field the ball
anywhere on the playing field or throw the ball without being hindered.

The act of a retired runner slowing and stopping in foul territory where they belong cannot be interference so by book rule no Interference.
__________________
"I couldn't see well enough to play when I was a boy, so they gave me a special job - they made me an umpire." - President of the United States Harry S. Truman
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Thanks to everyone on board runupdown Basketball 2 Sun Dec 19, 2004 06:31am
Is there a way on this board to MJT Football 2 Thu Oct 21, 2004 02:00pm
From another board Tbone Football 4 Fri Aug 01, 2003 03:56pm
My thanks to the board Ref in PA Basketball 2 Fri Jan 17, 2003 10:29am
That "other" board.. DrakeM Basketball 37 Sat Apr 27, 2002 11:14am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:14am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1