A thread for the umps...what would you do’s, oddball plays, war stories

Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch

Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.

Oct 11, 2010
8,337
113
Chicago, IL
I try not to say anything during DD's games, her game not mine.

C drops 3rd strike but DD is walking back to dugout, ump is just watching her. Hard to keep your mouth shut sometimes but I did. As soon as her foot hit the dugout Ump called her out. HC is confused what happened.
 
Mar 1, 2013
396
43
She stopped for a one-thousand-one second. Long enough to take a position facing the pitcher and look her in the eyes. Now call it?

If not immediate, how long is long enough. If she is the process of just changing directions, no call, but if you stop with feet apart and arms out looking directly at the pitcher (like you do after your lead off when the catcher is looking you down), then, in my opinion, it meets the criteria.

And, you can change directions once, but you can't stop (yes, there is a difference).
Agreed. It's definitely a "you'll know it when you see it type of thing"
 
Nov 18, 2015
1,585
113
It's that time of year that I'm reminded that 12U-C (USSSA) has a lot of new coaches as well as players and some new rules come into effect.
Best - or at least really good - tip for new coaches - watch the umpires, and learn their basic mechanics (not positioning so much as pre-pitch and in-play hand signals). It's a good way to help you notice when things like IF Fly (IFF) is in effect (especially useful if you coach 3B), or when/if IFF or Obstruction has been called.

New thread suggestion - "Things umpires wish coaches knew"?
 
May 29, 2015
3,731
113
Moving an outfielder into the infield will be 100% legal next year as long as there are at least two infielders on the dirt at the time of the pitch. It looks like they have 3 on the left and 2 on the right.

The rule as far as I understand it prohibits 4 outfielders, but it does not prohibit 5 infielders.



The onus to find a clear path is on the defense (we know this is true because, as a default, a runner getting hit with a throw is a live ball). The runner is still running toward home plate.. He moves into what ended up being the throwing lane before the ball is thrown, which means the defense could have and should have found a better throwing lane. I don't think there's any reasonable argument for calling the runner out here.

You can't logically argue the runner intentionally interfered with a throw when the act that was "intentional" came before any throw was made. There was literally no throw to interfere with at the time he veered into fair territory.

I hadn't seen the actual wording yet. I thought what I saw (unofficial) limited the number of infielders too. I could be totally wrong.

The last part of that (and a previous comment from another poster) brought up a tangent thought from me. For RLI at first base, NFHS states the batter-runner must interfere with the fielder taking the throw (not the throw itself or the fielder making the throw) ... if the runner repositioned based on the fielder setting up, would you consider that interfering with the fielder taking the throw? Purely a hypothetical question. (Personally, I'm still not convinced on that one. I find it awful darn hard to interfere with something that hasn't happened as of the runner's action.)
 
Aug 12, 2014
644
43
I try not to say anything during DD's games, her game not mine.

C drops 3rd strike but DD is walking back to dugout, ump is just watching her. Hard to keep your mouth shut sometimes but I did. As soon as her foot hit the dugout Ump called her out. HC is confused what happened.

We had an ump who called the batters out if they made any motion that wasn't directly toward 1b. Literally as soon a batter took one step backwards he'd call her out.
 
Jun 6, 2016
2,714
113
Chicago
I hadn't seen the actual wording yet. I thought what I saw (unofficial) limited the number of infielders too. I could be totally wrong.

The last part of that (and a previous comment from another poster) brought up a tangent thought from me. For RLI at first base, NFHS states the batter-runner must interfere with the fielder taking the throw (not the throw itself or the fielder making the throw) ... if the runner repositioned based on the fielder setting up, would you consider that interfering with the fielder taking the throw? Purely a hypothetical question. (Personally, I'm still not convinced on that one. I find it awful darn hard to interfere with something that hasn't happened as of the runner's action.)

Re: The MLB rule. I haven't seen the wording yet, but just going off some articles I've read and some ideas on how teams can still employ shifts.

One thing they could do, if they are limited to 2 people on the dirt, is just place an outfielder a foot on the grass. I'm curious to see how teams come up with different ideas to work within the confines of the new rule.

To your question: I think in order to interfere with the fielder taking the throw, there has to A) be a throw and B) be a reasonable chance to catch the throw. RLI is different, of course, because there is a specific area the runner is required to be in to "turn off" the rule.

What I like about the NFHS wording is that it removes the possibility of a fielder making a wild throw directly into a runner just to draw the call.
 
Aug 25, 2019
1,066
113
I try not to say anything during DD's games, her game not mine.

C drops 3rd strike but DD is walking back to dugout, ump is just watching her. Hard to keep your mouth shut sometimes but I did. As soon as her foot hit the dugout Ump called her out. HC is confused what happened.
That's the only time I would say anything at DD's games........................."RUUUUNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!"
 
Jun 6, 2016
2,714
113
Chicago
We had an ump who called the batters out if they made any motion that wasn't directly toward 1b. Literally as soon a batter took one step backwards he'd call her out.

This spring we had an umpire for a JV game (we played a very bad varsity team) who called the batter out because she didn't run to first quickly enough for him. She never made a move toward the dugout. She was in the box. It was maybe a second and a half. Catcher had no idea what was going on.

Same umpire called the game in I believe the 4th inning as soon as the other team (home team) took the lead. He never said it was going to be the last inning. He cited darkness, but we had a good 30-45 minutes of light left.

The same umpire had previously ejected our pitcher in baseball when he did nothing. Literally nothing. I was standing right near the backstop and watched the entire play. Apparently the pitcher had questioned something earlier in the inning before I arrived, so this guy was just looking to run him. There was a close play at the plate on a wild pitch, runner was safe, pitcher never opened his mouth, gave the umpire a look, anything (he even said after that he knew the guy was safe so he had no thoughts of arguing).

How come only good umpires stop umping because of abusive parents and not these guys?
 
May 27, 2022
412
63
We had an ump who called the batters out if they made any motion that wasn't directly toward 1b. Literally as soon a batter took one step backwards he'd call her out.

I've talked to 'several' umps about this - just to better understand. There are some that subscribe to that thought, but my problem with that, beyond the actual verbaige, is that many times the batter isn't looking to run, it is an afterthought. In that situation, the ump has, effectively negated the whole concept. But the actual letter of the law:

The batter-runner is out...
" Art. 4. . . The batter-runner fails to advance to first base and enter the dugout/bench area after a batter fair ball, a base on balls, a hit batter (F.P), a dropped third strike (F.P.), or catcher obstruction."
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
42,830
Messages
679,481
Members
21,445
Latest member
Bmac81802
Top