Mid-American Umpire Clinic Message Board
|
||
| Search For Similar Forums · Return to Website | ||
 First |
 Prev |
 Reply |
 Home |
Next  |
Last  |
| Viewing Page 1 of 1 (Total Posts: 10) |
| Author | Comment |
|
Jason Blackburn
Oct 12, 07 - 7:36 AM |
Play to Kick Around
This play actually happened to Joe Hooker and me yesterday at a Missouri State University fall world series game. See what you guys think... Runners on 2nd & 3rd, 1 out, 2 strike count on the batter. Batter swings, makes contact with the catcher's glove and misses the pitch. Catcher is unable to catch the ball. In the impending action, R3 scored, R2 advanced to 3rd, and B/R advanced to 1st on the dropped 3rd strike. Do you call catcher's interference, leave the ball in play because of the dropped 3rd strike, allow all action to happen and if all runners including the B/R reach their advance base, ignore the catcher's interference? OR Do you call catcher's interference, call time immediately because of strike 3 on the batter,enforce catcher's interference, give B/R 1st, keep R2 at 2nd and R3 at 3rd? |
Heath Kramer
Oct 15th, 2007 - 8:24 AM |
Re: Play to Kick Around
I'm not sure what the NCAA rule is this kind of thing but I'm pretty sure the MLB rules say that the manager can elect to choose the result of the play. Doesn't the rule also say that if the batter makes it to first on the play and the other runners advance that the interference is ignored? Slow down...let the play...then rule on it. Someone taught me to do that once. 
|
|
Jason Blackburn
Oct 15th, 2007 - 6:38 PM |
Re: Play to Kick Around
Well, the rule book is fairly vague in this situation. The manager has a choice to take the result of the play if the batter/runner is out before reaching 1st base. That doesn't apply to this situation. The general consensus is to let the play go (as we did) and if all runners advance (which they did) then you would ignore catcher's interference (which we did). But we have not heard anything definite yet. |
|
Heath Kramer
Oct 15th, 2007 - 7:44 PM |
Re: Play to Kick Around
Jason: Help me out with what I'm missing here. This is 6.08(c) from MLB rules: The catcher or any fielder interferes with him. If a play follows the interference, the manager of the offense may advise the plate umpire that he elects to decline the interference penalty and accept the play. Such election shall be made immediately at the end of the play. However, if the batter reaches first base on a hit, an error, a base on balls, a hit batsman, or otherwise, and all other runners advance at least one base, the play proceeds without reference to the interference. This seems fairly clear to me. It seems clear that you ruled correctly. Is the NCAA rule on this different? According to what I underlined you ignore the interference if the plays happens the way you described it. What am I missing? |
|
Jim Evans
Oct 15th, 2007 - 10:11 PM |
Re: Play to Kick Around
With all runners advancing and batter-runner making first. I would definately let the play stand as it was. From the way I read the situation that would be the only way to have it. Jim |
|
Jason Blackburn
Oct 16th, 2007 - 9:04 AM |
Re: Play to Kick Around
Here is the NCAA Rule: e. If any defensive player interferes with the batter’s swing or prevents the individual from striking at a pitched ball; A.R.—Catcher’s interference on a batter should be called only on the batter’s actual swing to hit the pitch. If a batter, during preliminary loosening-up swings, hits the catcher or the catcher’s mitt during the backswing, the umpire immediately should call time, and not interference. The pitch or swing should not be allowed since the batter’s concentration or rhythm could be affected. (1) If a play follows the interference, the offensive team may elect to ignore the interference and accept the play. However, if the batter reaches first base and all other runners advance at least one base, the interference is ignored. (2) Any runner attempting to steal on a catcher’s interference with the batter’s swing shall be awarded the base the runner is attempting to reach. If a runner is not attempting to steal on the catcher’s interference, the individual is not entitled to the next base, if not forced to advance because of the batter being awarded first base. The NCAA Rule is a little more vague than the MLB rule. The argument from MSU was that the ball had to be "hit" to be put in play. They felt that we should have called time immediately once the ball wasn't hit. I know that we got the call right, but it's something that you don't see everyday and gets your mind to thinking. I can honestly say that I've never seen that happen before. |
|
Tony Snyder
Oct 16th, 2007 - 1:28 PM |
Re: Play to Kick Around
can I add an instance to this situation? What if one of the runners choose not to advance? Would it then be the option of the offensive manager, or do call time and place runners acordingly? |
|
Jason Blackburn
Oct 16th, 2007 - 7:27 PM |
Re: Play to Kick Around
Yes and Yes If all runners do not reach their advance base, you enforce catcher's interference. Let's use our scenario. R3 scores, but R2 remains at 2nd, B/R reaches 1st. Call time, enforce catcher's interference. Return R3 to 3rd, keep R2 at 2nd, keep B/R at 1st, take run off the board. The manager is going to come out and want his run to score. He'll probably say something like, "Can't my run score on that?" You can hint around to him that he has an option on the play, he accepts the option and you score the run from 3rd. Again, a crazy play because you usually see the manager take the option when a player has been called out on the play. |
|
brad blacksys365@wildblue.net
Oct 19th, 2007 - 12:09 PM |
Re: Play to Kick Around
What is up @ msu? Jason, we had CI a couple of weeks ago there and I had it again there last Tues. My partner was on the dish and did not call it. There were no base runners and the batter did not advance. The msu players and coaches said there was contact but my partner said there was not. He did not come to me nor did the coaches ask him to. I am sure if we would have had runners and it was a real game they would have. I was in "A", do I jump in or should I wait for my partner to come to me? |
|
Jason Blackburn
Oct 20th, 2007 - 7:13 AM |
Re: Play to Kick Around
That's a real good question. What do you do if you know your partner missed one? In a real D-I game, it is going to hit the fan if the plate guy misses a catcher's interference. The first thing you should do is pre-game this. Before the game, go over the fact that if there is a controversial/questionable call we are unsure of, we need to get together and get the call right. Hopefully your partner will then be willing to come to you when the manager comes out. If he isn't coming to you right away, stay out of the conversation. You don't know what the manager is arguing and may not be arguing what you think he is arguing. If the conversation continues for a little while, or gets heated, you can start that way. At some point you could jump in and say, "Let me talk to my partner for a minute." Changing a call will result in the other manager coming out and he's not going to be happy either. So you need to be prepared to deal with him. Generally say things like we have to get the call right, we'd do the same thing for you. There is some debate on if you should jump in and give information (notice I didn't say change the call). In certain instances I am not opposed to that - missed (or not missed) tag, dropped ball on a bang-bang play, etc...something that is obvious except for the person making the call because he got blocked out. I don't think catcher's interference is one of those unless you see the catcher picking his glove up off the ground and your partner hasn't called it. Of course, in that situation your partner may have more problems than missing a catcher's interference  .
|
| First |
Prev |
Reply |
Home |
Next |
Last |
bravenet.com