Yappi Sports - THE Ohio Prep Sports Authority  

Go Back   Yappi Sports - THE Ohio Prep Sports Authority > Boys HS Sports > Baseball

Hello Guest!
Take a minute to register, It's 100% FREE! What are you waiting for?
Register Now
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old 10-06-14, 12:05 PM
bb9 bb9 is offline
All Region
 
Join Date: 10-04-05
Location: Cleveland Western Suburbs
Posts: 338
bb9
It is fair. Commonly misunderstood for some reason. A local MLB umpire, James Hoye had a crazy play similar to this a few years ago. Ozzie Guillen ended up getting ejected.

Last edited by bb9; 02-28-15 at 03:21 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 10-06-14, 06:41 PM
AllSports12 AllSports12 is offline
All World
 
Join Date: 01-31-07
Posts: 3,000
AllSports12 is on a distinguished road
No different than a batted ball squibbed foul between home and first or home and third and spinning back into fair territory where it is touched or comes to rest.
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 01-09-15, 04:00 AM
nobc nobc is offline
Junior Varsity
 
Join Date: 08-02-14
Posts: 26
nobc is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigmac27 View Post
Runners on 2nd & 3rd pitcher in the stretch runner on 2nd is taking a large lead due to not being held on. Pitcher is in the stretch. He spins & throws to the short stop in the base line halfway between 2nd & 3rd. Runners both got back safely but I argued with field umpire that this was a balk. My interpretation is that without stepping off the pitcher must throw in the direction of an occupied base. True or false?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllSports12 View Post
False. This is an easily mis-understood rule that varies somewhat between rule codes.

In short, the pitcher may throw to an unoccupied base in an attempt to put out the runner or to drive him back. Rule 6-2-4b
This one I have questions/comments on-
First off, in the above scenario the pitcher did not throw to an unoccupied base. As you said, 2nd and 3rd were occupied. A runner attempting to steal is an occupant of the base he is leaving, not the one he is going to. Correct?

I have never seen a pitcher throw the ball between bases before without stepping off. Based on a previous answer to a similar throw toward 1st base, I would think this is indeed a balk. No?

Last thing- Are you saying a pitcher who is engaged with the rubber can make a move to a base that nobody was on when he took the rubber? I am having trouble with that one. Can you help me out? I am fairly certain that is a balk. For example a runner of 1st base, nobody on second, the pitcher raises his front leg to begin his motion, runner goes. That pitcher may not make a throw to second base, correct?

I just cant think of any situation where it is legal to throw to an unoccupied base at all. Can you help me out on that?
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 01-09-15, 09:11 AM
AllSports12 AllSports12 is offline
All World
 
Join Date: 01-31-07
Posts: 3,000
AllSports12 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by nobc View Post
This one I have questions/comments on-
First off, in the above scenario the pitcher did not throw to an unoccupied base. As you said, 2nd and 3rd were occupied. A runner attempting to steal is an occupant of the base he is leaving, not the one he is going to. Correct?
Correct on the unoccupied base.... The premise of the question was the balk should be called because of where the throw went. (the shortstop who was between the bases) Because this was a legitimate attempt for a putout, this is perfectly legal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nobc View Post
I have never seen a pitcher throw the ball between bases before without stepping off. Based on a previous answer to a similar throw toward 1st base, I would think this is indeed a balk. No?
While rare, as long at the throw is a legit attempt to make a putout, it is legal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nobc View Post
Last thing- Are you saying a pitcher who is engaged with the rubber can make a move to a base that nobody was on when he took the rubber? I am having trouble with that one. Can you help me out? I am fairly certain that is a balk. For example a runner of 1st base, nobody on second, the pitcher raises his front leg to begin his motion, runner goes. That pitcher may not make a throw to second base, correct?

I just cant think of any situation where it is legal to throw to an unoccupied base at all. Can you help me out on that?
If the runner is on first, the move must be one continuous motion to the base. If that throw is to second, it's legal as long as it's in reaction to the runner advancing. (creates a legit attempt to make a put-out).

Example..... 1st and 3rd Pitcher in the stretch...runner takes off for second in an attempt to draw a throw and potentially create a run-down situation...... Pitcher stays set watching the runner from 3rd, then turns and wheels immediately towards second in an attempt to put out the runner from 1st......

Legal
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 02-25-15, 10:31 PM
HomeRunsNDunks HomeRunsNDunks is offline
All Ohio
 
Join Date: 12-09-12
Posts: 577
HomeRunsNDunks is on a distinguished road
This is more of a weird/miscellaneous question but...

What are the rules regarding feet position on the rubber? I've heard the rules go back and forth as far as both feet starting in contact with the rubber and only one having to start within contact. Also, do both feet have to be within the length of the rubber if not in contact? Or a could a RHP but his right foot on the very left side of the mound and then keep the other foot off to the left, or do they both have to be within the length?
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 02-27-15, 12:28 AM
AllSports12 AllSports12 is offline
All World
 
Join Date: 01-31-07
Posts: 3,000
AllSports12 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by HomeRunsNDunks View Post
This is more of a weird/miscellaneous question but...

What are the rules regarding feet position on the rubber? I've heard the rules go back and forth as far as both feet starting in contact with the rubber and only one having to start within contact. Also, do both feet have to be within the length of the rubber if not in contact? Or a could a RHP but his right foot on the very left side of the mound and then keep the other foot off to the left, or do they both have to be within the length?
Windup Position

Obviously, the pivot foot must be in contact with the rubber.

The non-pivot foot may be in any position on or behind a line extending through the front edge of the pitching plate (rubber).

In other words, the non-pivot foot does not have to touch the rubber, (it can) but if it isn't, it must be touching or be behind the front edge of the rubber extended.
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 03-14-15, 07:53 PM
maven maven is offline
Freshman
 
Join Date: 03-14-15
Posts: 6
maven is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by HomeRunsNDunks View Post
This is more of a weird/miscellaneous question but...

What are the rules regarding feet position on the rubber? I've heard the rules go back and forth as far as both feet starting in contact with the rubber and only one having to start within contact. Also, do both feet have to be within the length of the rubber if not in contact? Or a could a RHP but his right foot on the very left side of the mound and then keep the other foot off to the left, or do they both have to be within the length?
As you know, there are 2 legal pitching positions, the windup and the set.

In the windup, the pivot foot must be in contact with the rubber. The free foot must be on or behind the front edge of the rubber. So these 2 positions are both legal for HS:



This position, the so-called "hybrid" position, which is legal in pro and college baseball, is not legal in HS baseball, because the free foot is completely in front of the rubber:



The "hybrid" position is not a legal version of the set either, since the pivot is not parallel to the rubber. It's just illegal, and umpires should fix it (preferably in warmups).

In the set position, the pivot foot must be in contact with the rubber, and parallel to it. It must also be within the length of the rubber (though on some HS fields, with big holes in front of the rubber, we'll make allowances). The free foot may be anywhere in front of the plane of the front edge of the rubber.

Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 04-03-15, 02:16 PM
Grandesign Grandesign is offline
Varsity
 
Join Date: 05-26-12
Posts: 60
Grandesign is on a distinguished road
What you are calling a hybrid position fits the description of the set position.
The pivot foot is only required to be parallel if it is only touching in front of the pitchers plate.
I would agree if it were only the pitcher's heel that was touching in front, then that would warrant correction. per NFHS.
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 04-03-15, 05:46 PM
AllSports12 AllSports12 is offline
All World
 
Join Date: 01-31-07
Posts: 3,000
AllSports12 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandesign View Post
What you are calling a hybrid position fits the description of the set position.
The pivot foot is only required to be parallel if it is only touching in front of the pitchers plate.
I would agree if it were only the pitcher's heel that was touching in front, then that would warrant correction. per NFHS.
That's incorrect......

Because the non-pivot foot is entirely in front of a line extending through the front edge of the pitcher's plate, in order for the pitcher to be in the set position the pivot foot must be entirely in contact with the pitcher's plate or directly in front of the pitcher's plate....

Rule 6-1-3 Set Position
.... "Before starting his delivery, he shall start with his non-pivot foot in front of a line extending through the front edge of the pitcher's plate and with his entire pivot foot in contact with or directly in front of the pitcher's plate."

Maven's example of the hybrid shows the non pivot foot entirely in front of the pitcher's plate and the pivot foot not entirely in contact with the plate. (front half of the foot is not in contact)

It's called the hybrid because it is a combination of the two stances, and fits neither by definition.....
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 04-08-15, 09:27 PM
Grandesign Grandesign is offline
Varsity
 
Join Date: 05-26-12
Posts: 60
Grandesign is on a distinguished road
You can see there is room for interpretation.

6-1-3
...and with his entire pitching foot in contact with or in front of and parallel the pitcher's plate.

Read it this way...
(entire pitching foot in contact with)
or
( in front of and parallel)...
Reply With Quote
  #161  
Old 04-08-15, 10:50 PM
Grandesign Grandesign is offline
Varsity
 
Join Date: 05-26-12
Posts: 60
Grandesign is on a distinguished road
The test of the pivot foot being "entirely in contact with" the pitchers plate can never truly be met. Some part of the shoe or cleat will always be off.
Reply With Quote
  #162  
Old 04-08-15, 10:55 PM
Grandesign Grandesign is offline
Varsity
 
Join Date: 05-26-12
Posts: 60
Grandesign is on a distinguished road
So if the pivot foot is out front it should be (must be) parallel.

If the pivot foot is on top it can be considered fully in contact with.
Reply With Quote
  #163  
Old 04-08-15, 11:06 PM
AllSports12 AllSports12 is offline
All World
 
Join Date: 01-31-07
Posts: 3,000
AllSports12 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandesign View Post
You can see there is room for interpretation.

6-1-3
...and with his entire pitching foot in contact with or in front of and parallel the pitcher's plate.

Read it this way...
(entire pitching foot in contact with)
or
( in front of and parallel)...
Actually, there is no room for interpretation of the rule. There are very specific requirements for the positioning of the feet. (judgment of the position of the feet)

If the pivot is not entirely in contact with the pitching plate or in front of and parallel, then to be legal the non pivot foot must be on or behind a line extending through the front of the pitching plate.

If the pivot is entirely in contact with or in front of and parallel to the pitching plate, then the non pivot foot must be in front of that line extending through the front edge of the plate.... just as the illustrations show prior...
Reply With Quote
  #164  
Old 04-08-15, 11:11 PM
AllSports12 AllSports12 is offline
All World
 
Join Date: 01-31-07
Posts: 3,000
AllSports12 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandesign View Post
So if the pivot foot is out front it should be (must be) parallel.
Correct

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandesign View Post
If the pivot foot is on top it can be considered fully in contact with.
It's either fully in contact or it isn't.... The illustration above shows that it isn't...

In order for a foot to be on top and completely in contact with the pitching plate, the toe(s) or heel cannot be off the plate.... I've never seen a pitcher have his foot completely on top of the plate from the set position.......

and there's a reason for that.....
Reply With Quote
  #165  
Old 04-09-15, 07:09 AM
Grandesign Grandesign is offline
Varsity
 
Join Date: 05-26-12
Posts: 60
Grandesign is on a distinguished road
Smile

We agree on the last point.

What pitcher would place his foot entirely on top without hanging at least one cleat for traction?

Consider the rule with regard to where the pitcher's weight is bearing.
(entirely on the plate or out front)

The rule clearly makes acception for both instances.

So,

If the foot is out front with weight bearing on the clay it must be parallel.(no debate)
If the foot is on top with weight bearing on the plate, how many cleats will you let hang off the front before making a correction?
Reply With Quote
  #166  
Old 04-09-15, 08:20 AM
AllSports12 AllSports12 is offline
All World
 
Join Date: 01-31-07
Posts: 3,000
AllSports12 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandesign View Post


If the foot is on top with weight bearing on the plate, how many cleats will you let hang off the front before making a correction?
Once again, when I see this, it will be the first time in almost 40 years....

But, to answer you question, if the foot is at an angle in relation to the pitching plate, it's illegal by rule.
Reply With Quote
  #167  
Old 04-12-15, 12:14 PM
a_td a_td is offline
All Region
 
Join Date: 02-17-14
Posts: 294
a_td is on a distinguished road
A batter swings and misses. The momentum of the swing and miss causes the batter to spin around out of the batters box and over plate. The catcher attempts to throw out a stealing runner going to second base and makes contact with the batter in the process. Is this offensive interference and batter out?
Reply With Quote
  #168  
Old 04-12-15, 12:17 PM
bb9 bb9 is offline
All Region
 
Join Date: 10-04-05
Location: Cleveland Western Suburbs
Posts: 338
bb9
Yes the batter is out and runner goes back to 1st. On strike three they are both out.
Reply With Quote
  #169  
Old 04-12-15, 04:38 PM
AllSports12 AllSports12 is offline
All World
 
Join Date: 01-31-07
Posts: 3,000
AllSports12 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by bb9 View Post
Yes the batter is out and runner goes back to 1st. On strike three they are both out.
Not entirely true.......

The out on the runner is not automatic. The umpire must judge that the runner could have been put out absent the interference. If the umpire judges the putout could not have been made, the runner is returned.

7-3-5 -- PENALTY

If the pitch is a third strike and in the umpire's judgment interference prevents a possible double play (additional outs), two may be ruled out.

Last edited by AllSports12; 04-12-15 at 04:56 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #170  
Old 04-16-15, 08:55 PM
D1ball D1ball is offline
Varsity
 
Join Date: 08-20-12
Posts: 54
D1ball is on a distinguished road
1 out runners on first and third. Fly ball to left field and the runner on third tags. The runner on first forgets there is only one out and is running on the swing. Ball is caught in the outfield runner on third tags and scores while the runner on first continues to run and is between second and third when the ball is caught. Left fielder throws to first to complete the double play. Question is does the run count from third on the tag up??
Reply With Quote
  #171  
Old 04-16-15, 09:13 PM
AllSports12 AllSports12 is offline
All World
 
Join Date: 01-31-07
Posts: 3,000
AllSports12 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by D1ball View Post
1 out runners on first and third. Fly ball to left field and the runner on third tags. The runner on first forgets there is only one out and is running on the swing. Ball is caught in the outfield runner on third tags and scores while the runner on first continues to run and is between second and third when the ball is caught. Left fielder throws to first to complete the double play. Question is does the run count from third on the tag up??
Yes it does.

If the third out is due to a forced runner being put out or the batter/runner at first base, then the run would not count.
Reply With Quote
  #172  
Old 04-17-15, 06:45 PM
Yappi Yappi is offline
Go Buckeyes
 
Join Date: 04-15-01
Location: Ohio
Posts: 47,585
Yappi will become famous soon enough
Runner on 3rd base. Popup near the 3rd base line. Nobody out. Runner gets back to the base and the 3rd baseman is moving backwards to catch the ball (playing up for a bunt) and runs into the runner standing ON the base. The ball was in fair territory just behind the bag.

What is the call in these two scenarios:

1. 3rd baseman catches the ball after the contact.
2. 3rd baseman misses the ball due to the contact.
Reply With Quote
  #173  
Old 04-18-15, 07:37 AM
AllSports12 AllSports12 is offline
All World
 
Join Date: 01-31-07
Posts: 3,000
AllSports12 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yappi View Post
Runner on 3rd base. Popup near the 3rd base line. Nobody out. Runner gets back to the base and the 3rd baseman is moving backwards to catch the ball (playing up for a bunt) and runs into the runner standing ON the base. The ball was in fair territory just behind the bag.

What is the call in these two scenarios:

1. 3rd baseman catches the ball after the contact.
2. 3rd baseman misses the ball due to the contact.
This play is interesting because we cannot reasonably expect the runner to vacate the base, for if he does, he puts himself in jeopardy of being put out once the ball is caught. Therefore the rule makes this solely a judgment call by the umpire in this situation.

If in the judgment of the umpire the contact between the runner and the fielder was intentional and initiated by the runner, then the ball is dead immediately when the contact occurs. The runner is out for the interference and the batter is out as well. If there were two outs on this play, the batter would be declared out.

If the contact was judged not to be intentional, then the contact is ignored, ball remains live, and the result of the play (catch/no catch) stands.
Reply With Quote
  #174  
Old 04-28-15, 07:12 PM
Yappi Yappi is offline
Go Buckeyes
 
Join Date: 04-15-01
Location: Ohio
Posts: 47,585
Yappi will become famous soon enough
Runner on second. Ground ball to shortstop. Runner stops in the line of site of the shortstop and ground ball and then starts running again as the ball approaches.

If in the opinion of the umpire, the runner did this to distract the fielder and prevent him from seeing the ball (not to avoid the ball), can this be considered interference.
Reply With Quote
  #175  
Old 04-28-15, 07:30 PM
bucksman bucksman is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 10-10-01
Location: Having fun somewhere :-)
Posts: 30,686
bucksman will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yappi View Post
Runner on second. Ground ball to shortstop. Runner stops in the line of site of the shortstop and ground ball and then starts running again as the ball approaches.

If in the opinion of the umpire, the runner did this to distract the fielder and prevent him from seeing the ball (not to avoid the ball), can this be considered interference.
NFHS 8-4-2(g): "Any runner is out when he ... hinders a fielder on his initial attempt to field a batted ball."

The problem here is obviously defining the word "hinder". If the umpire judges the base-runner's action to hinder the fielder from making the initial play, then by definition it can/should be called interference.

However, from a pragmatic standpoint, unless the situation (and action) is obvious - I'm going to have a hard time as an umpire "selling" that play being called interference.
Reply With Quote
  #176  
Old 05-01-15, 08:07 AM
Jakethesnake14 Jakethesnake14 is offline
Junior Varsity
 
Join Date: 07-31-13
Posts: 43
Jakethesnake14 is on a distinguished road
Runners on 1st, 2nd. 2 outs. Pop toward Third. 3rd baseman runs in toward cut of grass to field Pop up. Overruns the ball. Ball hits off top of his glove bounces toward third on a hop. Ball Hits the runner from 2nd to 3rd. BU calls OUT for batted ball hitting the runner. correct?
Reply With Quote
  #177  
Old 05-01-15, 08:11 AM
bb9 bb9 is offline
All Region
 
Join Date: 10-04-05
Location: Cleveland Western Suburbs
Posts: 338
bb9
No, once the 3rd baseman touches it, that restriction is lifted. Play on unless the runner did something to intentionally touch the ball.
Reply With Quote
  #178  
Old 05-01-15, 08:13 AM
bb9 bb9 is offline
All Region
 
Join Date: 10-04-05
Location: Cleveland Western Suburbs
Posts: 338
bb9
To clarify, the fielder doesn't need to touch it. It needs to pass by them. All sports can probably give you the rule reference.
Reply With Quote
  #179  
Old 05-01-15, 08:54 AM
Jakethesnake14 Jakethesnake14 is offline
Junior Varsity
 
Join Date: 07-31-13
Posts: 43
Jakethesnake14 is on a distinguished road
I referenced rule 8-4k to both PU and BU for which I was relegated to the bench
Reply With Quote
  #180  
Old 05-01-15, 10:23 AM
Jakethesnake14 Jakethesnake14 is offline
Junior Varsity
 
Join Date: 07-31-13
Posts: 43
Jakethesnake14 is on a distinguished road
Is there a time limit on how long infield/outfield can be or is it a courtesy? What if: home team just gets done before umps come into field? can umps limit the amount of time?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:34 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Registration Booster - Powered By Dirt RIF CustUmz