|
Replies: 14
| visibility 2,559
|
Zealot [708]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 845
Joined: 11/7/04
|
Just talked to my friend who's been umpiring for 20 yrs &
Jun 2, 2012, 8:30 PM
|
|
he said that interference call technically was correct, BUT it is NEVER EVER called unless it clearly interferes with the play AND the runner at first is safe. Quite stunning that an umpire at that level makes that call in such a big moment. It clearly had an effect on the outcome.
|
|
|
|
 |
Walk-On [145]
TigerPulse: 33%
Posts: 325
Joined: 10/5/08
|
So the call was correct?
Jun 2, 2012, 8:43 PM
|
|
But your little league umpire friend said the college ump shouldn't have called it? Cool story.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zealot [708]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 845
Joined: 11/7/04
|
Re: So the call was correct?
Jun 2, 2012, 8:53 PM
|
|
I'm just passing along information from someone who's been umpiring for a long time and knows the rules. Yeah, the call was "technically" correct, but like I said it's only called if the double play isn't turned. It didn't interfere with the play, otherwise the double play would not have been turned. Understand now? Grats on the win; Now go #### yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [892]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 1394
Joined: 4/25/04
|
And the turn man on the double play always tags 2nd base too
Jun 2, 2012, 8:53 PM
[ in reply to So the call was correct? ] |
|
right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6794]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4214
Joined: 1/26/10
|
Re: So the call was correct?
Jun 2, 2012, 8:55 PM
[ in reply to So the call was correct? ] |
|
What he is saying is that call never happens unless the runner at first was safe...in this case, they got the double play which had no effect on the run at homeplate
Even if his hands were up and he was doing the macarena on second, the same outcome would have occurred...it did not interfere or change the outcome of the dp
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6937]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 22594
Joined: 5/4/03
|
Re: You can't expect any breaks in Columbia.***
Jun 2, 2012, 8:50 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Oh boo hoo!! It was flagrant and the ump would have been
Jun 2, 2012, 8:59 PM
|
|
an idiot if he didn't call it.
That play and Jack changing pitcher in the 7th was un called for!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zealot [708]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 845
Joined: 11/7/04
|
boo hoo?
Jun 2, 2012, 9:04 PM
|
|
Dude, sounds like you're doing a lot more crying than I am. I'm just logically and rationally breaking down a very, very questionable call, while you're acting like a whiny D!CK.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Was this a little league ump
Jun 2, 2012, 9:08 PM
|
|
Sounds like it. This is big boy baseball.
The ump made the right call so live with it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zealot [708]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 845
Joined: 11/7/04
|
Re: Was this a little league ump
Jun 2, 2012, 9:26 PM
|
|
This is big boy baseball.
No sh!t Sherlock. And when is the last time you saw that called when it obviously didn't affect the double play? Those calls aren't made unless the runner affects the throw to first, which didn't happen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [53716]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 43532
Joined: 11/17/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [53716]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 43532
Joined: 11/17/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [145]
TigerPulse: 33%
Posts: 325
Joined: 10/5/08
|
Re
Jun 2, 2012, 9:43 PM
|
|
I don't understand how no one understands that the ump sees interference and calls it BEFORE the play is over (when interference occurs) and at that point the ball is dead and runners are not allowed to advance. It has nothing to do with whether or not a runner would have been safe or not, or what runner could have scored, etc.
Interference=Dead Ball=No runners allowed to advance.
That's the rules.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fan [52]
TigerPulse: 21%
Posts: 106
Joined: 10/5/07
|
Re: Re
Jun 3, 2012, 11:59 AM
|
|
Exactly.
His friend/umpire must not be too bright to make the connection there.
That is like saying you don't call pass interference or any other penalty during a football play until it is completely over.
No. You call it when you see it and that interference was completely intentional. It was cheap.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [145]
TigerPulse: 33%
Posts: 325
Joined: 10/5/08
|
Re
Jun 2, 2012, 9:46 PM
|
|
And it's not whether or not it affects the throw or not, where the throw goes doesn't matter. It's whether or not the runner does something to hinder the thrower before he throws it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 14
| visibility 2,559
|
|
|
50
