1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Discussion: MLB Network

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by Stuart Sweet, Jan 1, 2009.

  1. Jan 3, 2009 #141 of 250
    Lord Vader

    Lord Vader Supreme Member DBSTalk Club

    8,758
    42
    Sep 20, 2004
    Galactic Empire
    Here, work on these now, and if you think the rule book's going to help, good luck.

    PLAY 1: Runner on first base with a 1-1 count on the batter. As R1 takes off to second, the pitcher doesn't come to a stop and balks as he throws a wild pitch. R1 rounds second and, seeing the ball has gotten away from the catcher, R1 puts on the gas and tries for third. The catcher retrieves the ball and fires to third where R1 is nailed for the out. What's the ruling?

    PLAY 2: Runners on first and third when R1 steals second. The catcher gloves the pitch to throw to second to nail R1, but the batter's swing on the 2-1 count interferes with the catcher. The throw to retire R1 at second is unsuccessful, but the second baseman covering fires to third to get R3, who had strayed off the base in an attempt to go home on the throw. R3 is nailed for the out while trying to get back to third. What's the ruling?
     
  2. Jan 3, 2009 #142 of 250
    redsoxfan26

    redsoxfan26 Godfather

    386
    0
    Dec 6, 2007
    West...
    Play 1:Just a guess here. After a balk is called it is a dead ball and the runner is awarded second base.

    Play 2:Runner on first is out due to interference. Runner on third is safe due to a dead ball called after the interference.
     
  3. Jan 3, 2009 #143 of 250
    Lord Vader

    Lord Vader Supreme Member DBSTalk Club

    8,758
    42
    Sep 20, 2004
    Galactic Empire
    I'll let some others chime in before I give the answers.
     
  4. Jan 3, 2009 #144 of 250
    DodgerKing

    DodgerKing Hall Of Fame

    2,045
    0
    Apr 28, 2008
    Using Geometers Sketchpad, I created an infield. I drew a blue diagonal line from 1st to 3rd base. What you are saying is that once the ball passes that blue segment, the ball is automatically fair and if it crosses into foul territory before it crosses the blue segment I drew, it is a foul ball.
     
  5. Jan 3, 2009 #145 of 250
    DodgerKing

    DodgerKing Hall Of Fame

    2,045
    0
    Apr 28, 2008
    The DH violates the very first rule of baseball.
     
  6. Jan 3, 2009 #146 of 250
    tj177mmi

    tj177mmi AllStar

    91
    0
    Mar 22, 2008
    Play 1: As soon as the balk is called, the play is blown dead and anything after that doesn't happen. R1 is awarded 2nd base and is NOT out.

    Play 2: Because there was a put out with the runner on 3rd base, the batter is not ruled out. There is no interference call because the catcher was able to make a play and record an out at 3rd. Runner at 3rd is out, runner advances to 2nd, and the batter is still up to bat. Thats how I interpret 6.06(c) of the MLB rule book.
     
  7. Jan 3, 2009 #147 of 250
    Lord Vader

    Lord Vader Supreme Member DBSTalk Club

    8,758
    42
    Sep 20, 2004
    Galactic Empire
    Yes, under OBR, that is correct. The rationale behind this interpretation is because the ball can't go "past" the first or third base bag, in the way we think of the word "past" unless it somehow is near it. So, the interp. became that at SOME point the ball had to be considered fair if it goes into the infield and was far enough to essentially have passed first or third; hence this diagonal of the square being the demarcation point.
     
  8. Jan 3, 2009 #148 of 250
    DodgerKing

    DodgerKing Hall Of Fame

    2,045
    0
    Apr 28, 2008
    He is out because once he rounds second, he is now on his own. After he is awarded 2nd base, he can then advance on his own. Since he was thrown out after he touched second base, he is out.
     
  9. Jan 3, 2009 #149 of 250
    Lord Vader

    Lord Vader Supreme Member DBSTalk Club

    8,758
    42
    Sep 20, 2004
    Galactic Empire
    Yet the DH is itself a rule.

    As an umpire, I hate it; and the NCAA's DH rule is the absolute WORST rule there is. It's so confusing and bizarre--really! the pitcher can be the DH AND pitch at the same time?!?--that our superiors recommend we carry these special laminated cards that have the DH rule and scenarios on them so that when a heads coach wishes to make a substitution, we give him the card and tell him to follow the instructions to see if what he wishes to do is permissible.
     
  10. Jan 3, 2009 #150 of 250
    jtcrusader

    jtcrusader Legend

    198
    0
    Jun 13, 2007
    Back on topic...
    ...the only glitch I have found is the guide is not in sync with the actual programming
     
  11. Jan 3, 2009 #151 of 250
    Lord Vader

    Lord Vader Supreme Member DBSTalk Club

    8,758
    42
    Sep 20, 2004
    Galactic Empire
    That has been the case on some movie channels lately, too.
     
  12. Jan 3, 2009 #152 of 250
    txtommy

    txtommy Icon

    805
    0
    Dec 30, 2006
    If this is the accepted interpretation by umpires then the rule book should be changed to state that. Professional umpires should insist that it be done. It would be much simpler wording than what is in there now and would not be open to any misinterpretation. Any ball touching the ground after passing a line drawn between 1st and 3rd is fair. There are hundreds of thousands of amateur umpires such as myself who would rule incorrectly on this one simply because all we have to go on is the rule book.

    And the correct word is 'passed' not 'past'.
     
  13. Jan 3, 2009 #153 of 250
    txtommy

    txtommy Icon

    805
    0
    Dec 30, 2006
    (1) The balk is considered 'no pitch' and runner advances one base while the ball is dead.

    (2) Assuming the batter was in the box taking a normal swing, then it is the catcher who interfered and the batter is given 1st base. R1 who was stealing is awarded 2nd base since he was in the act of stealing. R3 sent back to 3rd as ball is dead before play at 3rd.
     
  14. Jan 3, 2009 #154 of 250
    Lord Vader

    Lord Vader Supreme Member DBSTalk Club

    8,758
    42
    Sep 20, 2004
    Galactic Empire
    No, we don't have only the rule book to go on. If you're an umpire, you should know that. Furthermore, not everything that occurs is in the book.


    No, the correct word is "past" when said as "the ball went past" the base. It is "passed" when said as "the ball passed" the base. Be careful whom you attempt to correct.
     
  15. Jan 3, 2009 #155 of 250
    Lord Vader

    Lord Vader Supreme Member DBSTalk Club

    8,758
    42
    Sep 20, 2004
    Galactic Empire
    PLAY 1: Runner on first base with a 1-1 count on the batter. As R1 takes off to second, the pitcher doesn't come to a stop and balks as he throws a wild pitch. R1 rounds second and, seeing the ball has gotten away from the catcher, R1 puts on the gas and tries for third. The catcher retrieves the ball and fires to third where R1 is nailed for the out. What's the ruling?

    RULING 1: Once R1 advanced to second base, he did so on his own. Therefore, the balk is disregarded and any subsequent action stands (same thing if he had missed second base en route to third). However, the pitch is nullified and the count remains 1-1.

    PLAY 2: Runners on first and third when R1 steals second. The catcher gloves the pitch to throw to second to nail R1, but the batter's swing on the 2-1 count interferes with the catcher. The throw to retire R1 at second is unsuccessful, but the second baseman covering fires to third to get R3, who had strayed off the base in an attempt to go home on the throw. R3 is nailed for the out while trying to get back to third. What's the ruling?

    RULING 2: Once the ball is caught by the second baseman and the target runner is not tagged out, the ball is dead and the batter interference penalty is invoked: the batter is out and all runners return to the bases they occupied at the time of the pitch.
     
  16. Jan 3, 2009 #156 of 250
    txtommy

    txtommy Icon

    805
    0
    Dec 30, 2006
    I may have misunderstood this. Are you saying the batter intentionally interfered with the catchers throw or that the catcher stepped into the batters swing? If a batter is taking his normal swing how is that interference by the batter?
     
  17. Jan 3, 2009 #157 of 250
    Lord Vader

    Lord Vader Supreme Member DBSTalk Club

    8,758
    42
    Sep 20, 2004
    Galactic Empire
    There's no way a batter's "normal" swing is going to hinder a catcher's throw to retire a runner unless the catcher somehow intentionally went into the batter to initiate such contact. I would have worded it that way had that been the case, but that would have been too easy of a play to figure out.

    However, having said this, try this: Runner on 1st who's off with the pitch. The batter takes a mighty swing and his bat hits the catcher's glove on the backswing, knocking the ball out of the mitt as the catcher was trying to throw the ball to second to retire R1. What's the ruling?
     
  18. Jan 3, 2009 #158 of 250
    txtommy

    txtommy Icon

    805
    0
    Dec 30, 2006
    Again I see this as being an intentional vs. unintentional act. Did the batter attempt to interfere with the throw or was this just follow through from his swing and the catcher stepped forward into the swing? To me it is a judgement call that would have to be seen.
     
  19. Jan 3, 2009 #159 of 250
    Lord Vader

    Lord Vader Supreme Member DBSTalk Club

    8,758
    42
    Sep 20, 2004
    Galactic Empire
    Intent is irrelevant, as the batter can interfere even if he does so unintentionally. Example: He makes a big swing and his stride takes him onto the plate. As the catcher gets up to throw to second, he bumps into the batter whose stride took him in front of the catcher. Ruling: interference on the batter. He is not permitted to hinder or impede the catcher's attempt to retire a runner.
     
  20. Jan 3, 2009 #160 of 250
    txtommy

    txtommy Icon

    805
    0
    Dec 30, 2006
    This is from the guidelines given to us for high school umpiring. While I realize that this is not an official rulebook for all levels of play, it seems that intent is intent.

    Your statement was "The batter takes a mighty swing and his bat hits the catcher's glove on the backswing," since it did not state that he stepped out of the box or did anything to intentionally interfere then I would not rule against the batter. If he stepped in front of the catcher to block the throw or reached to intentionally hit the catchers glove that would be different. Your description sounds as if he just took a big home run swing and inadvertently hit the catcher's glove as the catcher moved into his throwing position.

    But this is from 6.06 of the official rules:

     

Share This Page