what happened here?
 

A video from the baseball board.

Watch play 5. NCAA game, 3 umpire crew, R1 on first.
What happened with the umpires coverage?

I see U3 chase the fly ball, PU halfway to third to pick up the lead runner, then U1 makes the call at the plate. Was this just a completely blown rotation/coverage?

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/XFDIk1qiec8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

What do you think is wrong with that rotation? It's textbook.

The only thing ACTUALLY wrong is PU is slightly in the runner's path.

In 3 man if a base umpire went out there is no rotation home. And yes, the plate umpire got in the path of the runner.

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?

Looks to me like the catcher simply airmailed the ball into right field. Personally I have nothing on the play.

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.

Actually from this year's CCA Manual (pages 102-103), the rotation was botched. When U3 chases, P has the runner at third and home, and U1 has first and second. Maybe they deviated and communicated. :)

Nah.....I don't think there was deviation and communication here.
Unfortunately it was a botched rotation. It was a botched rotation in 2012 (date on the video) too as the Manual had coverage on that play then, the same as it is now.

PU got himself behind the 8 ball from the start of the play by not first moving to the holding area in front of the circle. That movement would have kept him out of the R1's way when she rounded third.

I agree with SethPDX's assessment as to why U1 rotated home. Good job on his part in covering the hole in the rotation.

We've all been part of, or responsible for, a botched 3 man rotation at one time or another. We kick ourselves (both individually or a crew) after the game and try to learn from it. I'm sure it was no different for this crew.

As a side topic....
Realizing that U1 had his hands full getting his tail down to home to make the call......does anyone have OBS on F2 at 0:39?

Nothing from me either.

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.

ONLY in the wonderful world of FED. All others require a "quality throw" before you can call interference.

Honestly ... didn't see U3 chase on first watch. And he did that kind of halfway, which likely caused PU's confusion and U1's rotation. If you're going out, GO OUT! :) Looks like he sort of rotated, sort of chased, and got caught in between.

As for the baseball play, it's pretty clear cut nothing in everything but FED, and nearly as clear cut interference in FED.

U1 is still moving right up until the tag. Seems like with the late start he possibly should have stopped at 3BL extended? (Or gone inside?)

He did go out. He Paused, Read the play, and Reacted by chasing.
At 0:20 batter has made contact with the pitch.
At 0:22 U3 has pivoted w/back to infield and chasing into OF toward centerfield, then peels of to his right when he sees there's no catch.

U3 and U1 (in covering for PU) did their job. I'll say again, this rotation getting off the rails was the fault of the PU.
PU didn't read U3's chase and moved straight down the 3rd base line rather than initially moving to the holding area in front of the circle; and judging by what we see in the video, my guess is that he failed to communicate to U1 that the crew was now in two-man coverage.

I'll disagree. U1 should not be reading PU - he should be reading U3. If U1 reads the (appropriate) chase by U3, he reverts to a two umpire system - takes R1 to second and then picks up BR. If I were evaluating, my question to U1 is "who has the BR?" Sure it looks good by having a runner thrown out at the plate, but a cut and snap throw at the BR would have been u-g-l-y!

In further review, R1 may have been stealing or very fast, as she is past 2b when the ball hits the wall (hit and run maybe?). U1 may have been working down for the steal and that's why he didn't read.

That's not to say that PU could have used a better two umpire holding zone -deeper into foul territory and closer to the plate while (properly) reading the play (R1 was not slowing down).

With the NCAA's option to chase or not chase, all umpires have two reads: 1 - the ball (in who's area) and 2 - did my partner chase: "Read the ball, read your partner." It seems that U1 did not do this properly. And doesn't seem to be any communication.

Maybe. If he's going out, he takes an odd angle for it, and not many steps. I see him at 22 seconds, but he's not running anywhere that helps him with either distance or angle - and still at 22 the ball has already hit the wall. Seems kind of halfway to me, still, even after your explanation.

I agree that PU doesn't do himself any favors here, but perhaps he didn't read this as going out for the same reason I didn't. that ball gets to the wall AWFULLY quickly, and never looks like a trouble ball to me - so I have to think PU was not expecting U3 to go out.

Good points on U1.

Question I have on the bolded part, is if the PU reads that R1 (who we'll assume was on the move) is not slowing down at 2nd, the PU's movement from behind the plate should be straight to a holding zone between HP and 3rd as opposed to how its diagramed in the Manual?

Don't know about NCAA, but if it was correct, it is a bad mechanic as it leaves 1 & 2 uncovered.

Who am I to disagree with the manual?

If I were the plate umpire on this play, after reading U3 chasing, I'm moving to the holding zone knowing that I have responsibility for R1 at 3rd or home. Once I read that R1 is rounding 3rd, I'm moving back to the plate (while not being in the runner's way), maybe even trying to get point of plate. The key is reading the runner and the throw.

And when you look to your right and see U1 standing next to you? :)

We will have a nice little talk, maybe as soon as the next inning.

I agree - there is no way PU can get to all three spots in the diagram in sequence. If you read the hit to be for extra bases (the diagram on page 102), you go to the holding zone down the third base line and skip the circle. The diagram really should be changed. (See page 101 for the singles case.)

Another thought. The fact that PU was making no effort to work back toward the plate suggests to me that U1 had communicated that he had the plate covered. BWDIK.

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.

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.

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).

Key point is in red. In that play, I don't see the poor throw as a result of the batter runner's position, but as simply a poor throw. I am not awarding the defense on that play when the throw was so poor that there was no way to get an out. If it were not for the umpires judgment, of the cause of the poor throw, the catcher could simply see the better- runner out of the running lane and heave a throw to the right fielder, but claim it was because the batter-runner was out of the running lane.

I had a similar play in a youth (7-8 grade) baseball game this year (while being observed), which used HS rules. Bunt was laid down, and the runner was out of the running lane going to first (inside the diamond). The catcher picked up the ball and fired a shot about 15 feet over the first baseman's head. The coach came out arguing the runner out of the lane. I did not accept his argument and he eventually went back. After the game the observer said I was correct because in a reasonable umpires judgment, the bad throw was a bad throw, not one caused buy the position of the runner.