The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 19, 2014, 03:02pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The 503
Posts: 785
Maybe, just guessing here, PU went to 3B, then ready to go back home because he reverted to 2 man mechanics with U3 chasing. U1, meanwhile, rotated because he saw PU go to 3B and thought he had to cover home.


While you're at it, and I know it's a baseball play, but what do you have in the last play in the video (D3K) using softball rulesets?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 19, 2014, 03:51pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,340
Quote:
While you're at it, and I know it's a baseball play, but what do you have in the last play in the video (D3K) using softball rulesets?
Looks to me like the catcher simply airmailed the ball into right field. Personally I have nothing on the play.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 19, 2014, 08:46pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The 503
Posts: 785
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKBUmp View Post
Looks to me like the catcher simply airmailed the ball into right field. Personally I have nothing on the play.
Nothing from me either.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 20, 2014, 08:11am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Scranton, Pa.
Posts: 94
I see no OBS at :39, runner was never hindered.
For that matter, runner was not hindered by PU either.
She's just looking for an excuse.

As for the baseball play, a case could be made for a running lane violation.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 20, 2014, 11:04am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by PATRICK View Post
I see no OBS at :39, runner was never hindered.
For that matter, runner was not hindered by PU either.
She's just looking for an excuse.

As for the baseball play, a case could be made for a running lane violation.
As for the baseball play, it's pretty clear cut nothing in everything but FED, and nearly as clear cut interference in FED.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 26, 2014, 09:53pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn View Post
As for the baseball play, it's pretty clear cut nothing in everything but FED, and nearly as clear cut interference in FED.
Really? I'm not sure I would have interference on this even in Fed? Why? When the throw actually gets to the first baseman, the runner is sort of back in the running lane. I can see an argument both ways on this, but I am still putting the onus on the catcher to have a throw close to the target. That throw was way off target, to the point I find it real difficult to award the defense an out for the RLV. Had the throw been lower or more in line with the base, then I might have a RLV, but that throw was so far off I'd have a hard time making that call.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 27, 2014, 06:27am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: NY
Posts: 763
Another good example of why the NCAA should divide fly ball coverage regardless of whether an umpire goes out. U3 feels obligated to go out so that he can assume responsibility for the call. But in all reality, where can be possibly go? Open up, face the ball and make the call. No need to waste an umpire. Yes, he did what he should have per the CCA Manual. He only has a slit second to read the play before reacting. When in doubt, go out. And for those who say he took a funny angle, WRONG! He takes an approach that gives him a proper angle to see through the play, as opposed to running at the ball like so many umpires do. That is why I refuse to use the word "chase" to describe "going out." We aren't chasing anything. Players chase the ball. Umpires do not.
__________________
Kill the Clones. Let God sort them out.
No one likes an OOJ (Over-officious jerk).
Realistic officiating does the sport good.

Last edited by EsqUmp; Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 06:29am.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 27, 2014, 08:04am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 1,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by chapmaja View Post
Really? I'm not sure I would have interference on this even in Fed? Why? When the throw actually gets to the first baseman, the runner is sort of back in the running lane. I can see an argument both ways on this, but I am still putting the onus on the catcher to have a throw close to the target. That throw was way off target, to the point I find it real difficult to award the defense an out for the RLV. Had the throw been lower or more in line with the base, then I might have a RLV, but that throw was so far off I'd have a hard time making that call.
Note that MD was commenting on the baseball play...

In FED baseball a "quality throw" is not required. If the batter-runner's presence out of the lane is the cause of the throw being bad (umpire judgment) then interference can be ruled.

FED softball does require a "quality throw" (ie: one that would have a reasonable chance of being caught by the fielder taking the throw).
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 19, 2014, 04:58pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Glendale, AZ
Posts: 2,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by SethPDX View Post
Maybe, just guessing here, PU went to 3B, then ready to go back home because he reverted to 2 man mechanics with U3 chasing. U1, meanwhile, rotated because he saw PU go to 3B and thought he had to cover home.


While you're at it, and I know it's a baseball play, but what do you have in the last play in the video (D3K) using softball rulesets?
That is the play that was the subject of the baseball board post.
I agree with RKB.....I got nothin'.

Evidently, in some baseball rulesets, this could be ruled as interference.
__________________
It's what you learn after you think you know it all that's important!
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 20, 2014, 09:30am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 1,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
That is the play that was the subject of the baseball board post.
I agree with RKB.....I got nothin'.

Evidently, in some baseball rulesets, this could be ruled as (running lane) interference.
ONLY in the wonderful world of FED. All others require a "quality throw" before you can call interference.
Reply With Quote
Reply

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
Never happened to me before stripes Basketball 9 Mon Dec 17, 2007 05:14pm
well it happened, well almost happened cmathews Basketball 7 Mon Jan 29, 2007 04:17pm
Whatever happened to "Whatever happened to class"? UmpJM Baseball 7 Sat Jul 30, 2005 03:49pm
This really happened - not! Mark Padgett Basketball 20 Sun Mar 20, 2005 10:28pm
Not really sure what happened........ wadeintothem Softball 8 Wed Mar 16, 2005 02:47pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:42pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1