B/r goes to 1st-but it's not a 3KD
 

We have had way too many B/R's going to 1st on "what they thought" was a 3rd strike dropped but it wasn't a 3KD situation. Thus you know the drill, catcher throws-all runners are now stealing, etc. Is it proper to use ASA 8-7-P-"note" (continuing to run and drawing a throw) ?

Why shouldnt the defense be smart enough to know it is not a D3K and actually make a play on the correct runner?

The BR is exempt from that type of INT on a U3K, which is usually interpreted to include mistaken situations. It is also generally accepted that we can't tell if the BR was doing a deliberate deceit.

I can understand a firm stance as you mention. However around here 98% of our games are 11-13, 14-18 Recreation Council level, and not School ball or Private Club level players. Our darn Coaches don't know the rules, and they are the ones sending the B/r.

Cecil, I did see in the note it's not applicable to a B/r who IS ENTITLED, this I was thinking maybe I have something here ?

That word was not in the rule until last year and was inserted without any explanation nor has there been any rules clarification published regarding the rule being treated any differently than it was in the past.

It is poor wording and somewhat ambiguous. If the player is a batter-runner they must be entitled and if they are entitled, their running violates no rule.

That's on the coaches to fix, and not the umpires to fix for them.

For crying out loud, this isn't the DP/FLEX rule! How hard is it for coaches and players to understand that batters can only advance to first base on an uncaught third strike when first is unoccupied or when there are two outs?

From the ASA website:

A common item for discussion among umpires is game management. The discussion centers around ways umpires can achieve a game without issues. Sometimes the discussion leaves out an important detail … “Game Control”. Game Control can be described as taking charge of an unusual situation before the situation results in chaos. A good tool for game control and game management is often referred to as “preventive umpiring”. In fact, if umpires use preventive umpiring techniques then game control and game management would become easier. Therefore, good “Game Control” leads to good “Game Management”.

Umpires should not use the term game control as a tool for an umpire to be involved every situation occurring on the ball field. Game control should seldom, if never, be noticed: Example, if we have a batter-runner who starts to run to 1B thinking ball four has been awarded; the umpire should call “time” and bring the batter back to the plate. The same holds true with runners on 1B and 2B and the batter takes off for 1B thinking it is ball four causing runners to advance. To eliminate confusion for both the offense and the defense, the umpire should call “time.” An umpire with good game control who gives a loud “time” can prevent the chaos before it gets a chance to start.


Just call time! End the chaos! :rolleyes:

FED Case Play 8.1.1.B directs the plate umpire to "forcefully announce that B2 is out" in this scenario when B2 is not allowed to advance to first base. I use that under all codes. Believe it applies to all.

11-13 is old enough to know this rule. It's not your fault if they don't. This is NOT interference.

Yes, but just once. Don't be that umpire that continually yells that the batter is out over and over. Call it. Once. Like you would any other play.

And every single clinician I've ever discussed this with agrees this advice is horrible.

Do you disagree with my earlier comment?

"which is usually interpreted to include mistaken situations"

kinds of mistakes,
1) U3K but out
2) uncaught strike 2
3) not a strike

Especially if it causes a disadvantage to either team :eek:, or is that what you meant?

And I agree with every single clinician you've ever discussed it with.

But...does that mean you can ignore it, if it is a directive from the ASA "higher-ups"? When is a published directive the letter of the law and when is it just friendly advice?

I report to my bosses. I will call it as my bosses tell me to call it.

They report to their bosses.

Quote:

Umpires should not use the term game control as a tool for an umpire to be involved every situation occurring on the ball field. Game control should seldom, if never, be noticed: Example, if we have a batter-runner who starts to run to 1B thinking ball four has been awarded; the umpire should call “time” and bring the batter back to the plate. The same holds true with runners on 1B and 2B and the batter takes off for 1B thinking it is ball four causing runners to advance. To eliminate confusion for both the offense and the defense, the umpire should call “time.” An umpire with good game control who gives a loud “time” can prevent the chaos before it gets a chance to start.

Couple problems with this. To start, because multiple scenarios were offered as "examples", where to you draw what will became a very blurry line to many. Do you kill the ball every time you find a team doing something "dumb" that confuses the opponent? Did you think it just may be a planned play? It happens. More in my past than in the present, but those coaches were a bit smarter then :)

I'm in the camp of immediately emphasizing the call and count (if not an out or walk) LOUDLY. And follow that up with an immediate direction to the batter to return to the batter's box LOUDLY and start your 10 second count. I would expect the umpire to not be quick in adding a strike to the count, but if the batter does not immediately return as directed, that strike is an option.

Yes, some would consider that OOO, but it is a tool that is provided to the officiating of the game and it WILL stop the antics. Again, not suggesting an umpire use this to punish teams, but be lenient to a point in application. However, when you run up against a team/coach that is going to test your authority and resolve, you just may need to enforce the rule (ASA 7.4.K; NFHS 7.3.1).

Again, it is only a tool available to you, not a sledge hammer meant to crush a team/coach because you can.

Maybe it's just a softball difference, but in baseball I will repeat it a few times forcefully at all levels up through NCAA. I'm preventing a problem for myself, mainly. I'll leave the ball live, of course, but I'm trying to stop F2 from throwing the ball to try to retire a BR that doesn't exist.

So you are coaching ;)<!-- / message -->

No, I'm using preventive officiating. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. :D

I don't call it over and over. But I do say it twice for emphasis.

There are a few occasions that, with game management in mind, I repeat a call. On a dropped transfer at second base, I will emphasize the runner out twice to let everyone know I saw a voluntary release. On a foul ball where runners continue to run, I will repeat a foul call. I don't fly off the handle with extraneous antics or extra words like I've seen other umpires do. But it tends to get the point across.