Jump to content

Ask MrUmp1 your rules question.


Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
[quote name="MrUmp1" post="1218538" timestamp="1336177043"]
a stating pitcher can be removed as pitcher then put back in as a pitcher as long as he has not left the game. Only
the starting pitcher can do this
[/quote]I have seen a non starting pitcher enter to pitch twice this year.  EX. the kid started in RF, came into pitch in 2nd inn, was pulled in th 4th and moved back to RF and put back into pitch in the 7th to close the game.... what I was told by 2 different umps that it is by interpretation of the rule. Could you give me the rule, and number so I can see what they are debating
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK lets see if maybe I get this right cause it gets really complicated.  Starting pitcher can come back in to pitch as long as he does not violate any substitution rules, the reliever did not throw 9 or more warm up pitches, and the starting pitcher is replacing the guy that relieved him. As far as a non starter, he can pitch, go play a position and then after at least one batter can come back to pitch but can only do this once an inning.  He must stay in the game and also replace the player that relieved him. I think this is right but it is just not spelled out clearly in the rules. It is all there in bits and pieces. Teeboan challenged me to get to the bottom of this. Tee, what do you think???     
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name="hitman009" post="1219644" timestamp="1336485130"]
so what you are saying is a non starting pitcher can pitch more than once a game as long as he stays in the game/line up. correct?
[/quote]

Yes rule 3-1-2 helps explain the non starter rule
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a question. In a playoff game saturday a hitter in the batters box was standing on the line in front of the box. The kid hit the ball but in the process his stride was outside the box. The catcher questioned the ump on the ruling and was told he could not call balls and strikes and watch the feet too what is the ruling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a foot is completely out of the box nothing touching the line and contacts the ball, the batter is out. It is very hard for a plate umpire to see this as his focus is on the pitch coming over the plate. A good plate umpire is going to watch the ball all the way into the glove before making his call and watching a batters feet is not a priority. It's not a call you see very often and it is usually a very flagrant thing before it is called.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name="hitman009" post="1219644" timestamp="1336485130"]
so what you are saying is a non starting pitcher can pitch more than once a game as long as he stays in the game/line up. correct?
[/quote]
And replaces the player who replaced him as the pitcher. He can not come back to pitch if there has been multiple pitching changes. That was the one really tricky part of the rule.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

0-2 the count. Runner on third trying to squeeze. Batter misses the bunt completely and the catcher misses it. Is this a case where the batter can run because of dropped strike three? Or since he attempted to bunt with two strikes and did not lay it in fair play, he is out?  I have not witnessed this or ever heard of it happening, just a thought I had while playing the other day. 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

doesn't matter if he is trying to bunt or not. If first base was not occupied at the time of the pitch or there are two out, a missed third strike by catcher and the batter may try to run to first. Even if you do not swing and catcher misses ball you can run to first.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

had this happen today..runner on 1st ball hit to 2nd baseman, throws ball to ss who throws ball over 1st baseman head ball hit pole ple outside dugout rolls towards homeplate umpire called runner out at 2nd and awarded batter runner 3rd base.. all rules I looked up state 2 bases the one he is going to plus 1 ...the batter runner should have been awarded 2nd base not 3rd..wrong or right
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name="exmarine" post="1221963" timestamp="1336947994"]
had this happen today..runner on 1st ball hit to 2nd baseman, throws ball to ss who throws ball over 1st baseman head ball hit pole ple outside dugout rolls towards homeplate umpire called runner out at 2nd and awarded batter runner 3rd base.. all rules I looked up state 2 bases the one he is going to plus 1 ...the batter runner should have been awarded 2nd base not 3rd..wrong or right
[/quote]

Well this one is a judgement call on the umpire. If he feels like the runner has already crossed first base and has attempted to run to second (even just a step) then the runner is then officially headed to second. Then his plus 1 would be third.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree HD about the judgement call.. but it was a routine double play, no 14 yr old is that fast, and by the rule book, once the thrown ball leaves the hand it then becomes where the batter/ runner is..not where the ball lands, touches the ground goes into a dugout or goes into the stands,  so again I say that would have to be one fast 14 yr old, bases are 90' and he batted from the right side.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
I know this has probably been covered here, but I really did not want to go through 20+ pages.  Senior League game at Bridge City (13 - 16).  Two outs and runners at first and second.  A ground ball is hit to the 5/6 hole between short-stop and third base.  The short-stop comes up to make the play and as he fields the ball is ran into by the runner coming from second to third base.  The collision knocks the short-stop sideways but he is still able to get a throw off.  The umpires stated it was "incidental" contact, and ruled everyone safe.  Is that the proper call, or is it a case of interference? 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name="Chester86" post="1228617" timestamp="1338911804"]
I know this has probably been covered here, but I really did not want to go through 20+ pages.  Senior League game at Bridge City (13 - 16).  Two outs and runners at first and second.  A ground ball is hit to the 5/6 hole between short-stop and third base.  The short-stop comes up to make the play and as he fields the ball is ran into by the runner coming from second to third base.  The collision knocks the short-stop sideways but he is still able to get a throw off.  The umpires stated it was "incidental" contact, and ruled everyone safe.  Is that the proper call, or is it a case of interference?
[/quote]
It is the runners obligation to not make contact with the fielder. Defensive team has the option of taking the play or the penalty. In this case there is no incidental contact none can be made by a runner. Thanks 643 for chipping in I haven't checked board been out of town.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats just 1 I remember, actually I lost a protest in PONY ball on this rule, lost 20$ (a cost of filling a protest) and I was within the rules but still LOST. Had a bunted ball on the 1st baseline, pitcher fielded then dropped the ball then kicked it trying to pick it up again, runner made nonintentional contact n both hit the ground. Rung the batter-runner up for contact n I protested...   
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...
  • KF89 unpinned and pinned this topic

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,972
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    cfbswami
    Newest Member
    cfbswami
    Joined



  • Posts

    • No worries. My thing is this. Trump was badly flawed. We knew it going into 2016. As an incumbent, there really wasn’t much of a chance to nominate a different candidate in 2020. But after all that happened during Trump’s term, the election loss and fiasco that followed, and everything else that he’s been a part of since… we should have chosen a different nominee in 2024. That’s been my point all along, but that’s not what we did. His followers are very vocal and infect all levels of the Republican Party leadership-especially in local counties and precincts. Enough people decided that Trump is the only person who should be considered to be the eventual R candidate that he cruised to the nomination in spite of everything, purely based on the cult of personality, IMO.  All of the signs were there. Trump is in a dead heat with Biden and has been all along, while every other potential R candidate enjoyed double digit leads over Biden. Literally all we had to do is pick someone over Trump and they’d cruise to a win over Biden-but we’d rather lose with Trump than win with someone else.    Names like Gary Hart and John Edwards come to mind. Those guys were Dems with a small fraction of Trump’s baggage, but the party still dumped them and moved on… I can’t understand why the Rs have refused to self-police and choose someone with decency… who would also be able to win the popular vote. We (the Rs) should have made DJT an old memory… but force the Ds and independents to do it for us. 
    • Trump literally ran on locking up hillary... ppl seem to 4get that
    • Currently in a monsoon raining badly here in Lufkin game will start late 
    • I read your posts and agree on some things and disagree with some.  I guess my one question is (in your opinion) who should we vote for?  Third party candidates do not get elected.  Kennedy is only going to dilute votes which will benefit Democrats.  Write-in votes do not win elections and I’m not even sure they are counted in a presidential election.  Many people get on and express views and tell us what is wrong with X, but never give the answer for Y.  I am extremely sarcastic and passive-aggressive, but genuinely hope this post doesn’t come across that way.  Trump has my vote until someone persuades me otherwise (and I’m a Never Biden).  Had another R been nominated they would have had my vote.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...