Jays/Rangers getting weird!

[BretMan]

Let's go the other way: runner at 1B, catcher throws ball at batter in the box intentionally - dead ball, runner cannot advance (thus eliminating anything resembling a delayed steal), no penalty?

Now we're getting into pretty third-world "what-if's"...

Why would a catcher purposely throw the ball at the batter to prevent a steal that isn't even happening yet?

Would you consider a throw "AT the batter" as a return throw "TO the pitcher"?

How would you react after I ejected your catcher for intentionally throwing the ball at the batter?

But let's say F2 is a particularly good actor and pulls this off, fooling the umpire, one time. Is she going to fool him (pick a number) twice...three times...four times...before she gets tossed out of the game?

 

[smddad]

How do you reverse a dead-ball call? Once the umpire kills the play, the offense and defense stop playing.

 

[Comocoach]

How do you reverse a dead-ball call? Once the umpire kills the play, the offense and defense stop playing.

See post #19

 

[BretMan]

How do you reverse a dead-ball call? Once the umpire kills the play, the offense and defense stop playing.

Sometimes they do. Sometimes they don't. MLB rules allow umpires to place runners wherever they judge they would have reached had the correct call initially been made. In this case, they judged that the runner would have scored if the ball had been kept live. Looking at where the ball was rolling and where the runner was, I would agree.

 

[BuckeyeGuy]

Now we're getting into pretty third-world "what-if's"...

a) Why would a catcher purposely throw the ball at the batter to prevent a steal that isn't even happening yet?

b) Would you consider a throw "AT the batter" as a return throw "TO the pitcher"?

c) How would you react after I ejected your catcher for intentionally throwing the ball at the batter?

I notice that you didn't answer the question. But I'll play:

a) exactly - she just prevented any possibility of a steal, including a delayed steal

b) given what I saw last night I'll give you a conditional "maybe"

c) about the same way you'd react if I tossed your hypothetical batter? Just guessing here.

 

[BretMan]

Let's see...I've already stated that I believe any contact with a routine return throw to the pitcher, when no play is being made on a runner, is a dead ball.

With the increasingly bizarre situations that are being tossed out, I've said that I'd eject a player for purposely throwing the ball at another player.

Which part of your question didn't I answer?

 

[Crabby_Bob]

Ideally, you hope that you never call a dead ball when the situation doesn't warrant it. But if you do, remember that there is a guideline for umpires that if a call is reversed they can place runners as they see fit to remedy the reversed call. In the Jays game it was judged that the dead ball call didn't impede the defense and that the runner would have scored anyway.

The rule of thumb is that once a ball is called foul you should stick with the call. Many times the defense will stop playing or the runner will stop running in reaction to a foul ball. In Major League Baseball they do reverse foul calls- I've seen it happen myself several times.

Not sure what the casebooks would say, but OBR 5.02 is clear: "(5.02) While the ball is dead no player may be put out, no bases
may be run and no runs may be scored, except that runners may advance one or more bases as the result of acts which occurred while the ball was alive (such as, but not limited to a balk, an overthrow, interference, or a home run or other fair ball hit out of the playing field)." Hence, the game was played under protest.

NCAA has made it quite clear in 2016-17 softball rule changes that dead balls shall not become undead: "A dead ball cannot be revived and brought back to life. It remains dead until an umpire indicates resumption of play."

 

[BretMan]

This is the rule that was applied in correcting the call. Basically, the umpires can come up with any solution they see fit to remedy a reversed call. In this case, they judged that the runner would have scored anyway.

8.02(c) If a decision is appealed, the umpire making the decision may ask another umpire for information before making a final decision. No umpire shall criticize, seek to reverse or interfere with another umpire’s decision unless asked to do so by the umpire making it. If the umpires consult after a play and change a call that had been made, then they have the authority to take all steps that they may deem necessary, in their discretion, to eliminate the results and consequences of the earlier call that they are reversing, including placing runners where they think those runners would have been after the play, had the ultimate call been made as the initial call, disregarding interference or obstruction that may have occurred on the play; failures of runners to tag up based upon the initial call on the field; runners passing other runners or missing bases; etc., all in the discretion of the umpires.

 

[SoCal_Dad]

Not sure what the casebooks would say, but OBR 5.02 is clear: "(5.02) While the ball is dead no player may be put out, no bases may be run and no runs may be scored, except that runners may advance one or more bases as the result of acts which occurred while the ball was alive (such as, but not limited to a balk, an overthrow, interference, or a home run or other fair ball hit out of the playing field)." Hence, the game was played under protest.

The exceptions are not limited to the ones listed. They include dead ball awards, which is basically what the umpire did in awarding home.

NCAA has made it quite clear in 2016-17 softball rule changes that dead balls shall not become undead: "A dead ball cannot be revived and brought back to life. It remains dead until an umpire indicates resumption of play."

I don't see how this is applicable in this case since the ball wasn't made live until after the award was made. This is aimed at preventing a dead ball being revived in the middle of play - e.g. foul ball call being overturned mid-play and play continuing as if ball was never dead.

 

[Crabby_Bob]

The exceptions are not limited to the ones listed. They include dead ball awards, which is basically what the umpire did in awarding home.

Not so much. Each of of the exceptions listed, and others by implication, requires the placement of runner(s) after the ball becomes dead for a rules infraction. In this case, the umpires "got the call right" by advancing the runner after calling the ball dead. They're allowed to do this under 8.02.

I don't see how this is applicable in this case since the ball wasn't made live until after the award was made. This is aimed at preventing a dead ball being revived in the middle of play - e.g. foul ball call being overturned mid-play and play continuing as if ball was never dead.

I disagree, see the reasoning given for the added language: "Rationale: In the interest of 'getting the call right', some umpires have received information from their partners and wanted to change their call and use their judgement in placing base runners. The NSRC continues to be concerned about their assessments of runners speed and fielders throwing strengths/accuracy so it continues to maintain the long time tradition of keeping dead balls dead."

The lesson is do not prematurely or erroneously kill the ball.