Touching bases rule

Coach...thanks for the response. Certainly doesn't impact this discussion, but I was curious your level of coaching. You certainly attacked me in one of your posts, so I wanted to appreciate your background.

FYI, Umpires (at all levels) are required to attend clinics, but the best education they get is riding down the road with other umps or sitting in the lockerroom before games. I rose quickly to the college level because I was tutored by 2 of the finest college umpires anywhere. They took me under their wing & helped me understand the subtleties of baseball. A huge part of that was using judgment. That goes way beyond "Safe/Out Ball/Strike". It has to do with managing the game so that the kids can compete fairly & decide the outcome.

Technically any coach who charges an ump or questions balls & strikes is immediately subject to ejection. But no ump worth his salt follows that rule. Discretion is required. Technically leaving the dugout to celebrate a home run is cause for immediate ejection, but any ump who enforces that rule is an idiot. Technically if a kid is improperly equipped, he should be removed from the game...but when an ump spots a gold chain, he merely asks the kid to remove it.

Technically the Snow kid was out for missing first. IMHO Independence showed no class appealing that. I would not have rewarded them.

We are splitting hairs here, but I am confident that a high high percentage of the best in Blue (in that situation) would NOT have made the call either (unless the kid missed the base by a mile). I can't prove that, but I'm certain it's true.

PS--To the inquiry about the situation: Round 4 of state playoffs, West Forsyth's Dusty Snow smashed a bottom of the 6th inning home run that would have given his team a 7-6 lead. But he missed 1st base. Disputed call in the eyes of the WF fans. Independence appealed & Snow was called out. Indy won 7-6.

 

That is an accurate description of what we've been told happened, but it was South Meck who appealled and who won the game, not Independence. I know the Independence folks can take care of themselves on here, but because many of us believe that making such an appeal in that situatin is just something you don't do in baseball, I don't want Independence and Coach Coltrane to be wrongly tagged with making that decision. Coach, if you go to the round 4 results thread, you will see a bunch more about the situation.

 

Yankees, durn you've had some tough breaks. Anyway, thanks for your comments and yes I respect your opinion also.

I just believe there's some things in baseball (probably all sports) that you JUST DON'T DO. I mean I've never seen Tiger Woods jumping and waving his arms when Mickelson was trying to putt.

As for the best umpires, I believe the umpires who umpire the longest and advance the furthest, are the ones who not only know the rulebook, but they also use the best judgement and have the best communication with the players/coaches...

 

My bad...showing my age....West played Independence in Round 3. It was South Meck. It's tough getting old.

 

You and me both...

 

STILL UNBELIEVABLE...

A few replies to the following:

1) coachevans26:

2) UK7Dook3

3) t21

I’m not singling you out just to be singling you out, but thought your comments needed replies...



TO COACHEVANS26:

"Could someone offer the scenario, please so I will know the whole situation."

Read the first post of this, but in short, a kid missed first base, after hitting a homerun, and was called out on appeal because the rule states you have to touch all the bases.

If you also look at the 20 or more examples I posted, you will see this is enforced at even the highest level.



TO T21:

You mentioned the speed limit scenario again, so I’ll repeat what I said again, "The speed limit analogy SOUNDS like a good analogy. Unfortunately, it falls apart when you consider that lives aren’t at stake in a baseball game (unless you have one of those crazed and volatile parents who like to shoot umpires or fight them). You’re comparing apples and oranges. Stick to the rules in the book, change the rules if you don’t like them, but don’t ignore the rules when they’re there because you think it’s a bad rule."

Remember, your opinion, unlike the rule, is only your opinion, and cheats the players who play by the rules.


You also said, "...I also believe there are certain things in baseball that you "JUST DON'T DO". And I'm sorry, but when a kid (especially an amateur) hits a homerun over the blas-ted fence, there's just certain things you "JUST DON'T DO"."

Did you miss ALL OF THOSE EXAMPLES I POSTED? If you JUST DON’T DO this in baseball, THEN WHY DID THOSE INCIDENTS HAPPEN? Those runners weren’t given an advantage, but the umpires, AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL, called them out. What gives? OPINIONS DO NOT SUPERCEDE THE RULES.

You also said, "A homerun over the fence is a situation where you just tip your hat, its called RESPECT. The opposing coach shouldn't appeal anything, and the umpire shouldn't go looking for reasons to impact the game either, the ump should just throw out the next ball. "

RESPECT? The kid should respect the game by not missing the bag by a foot AND, in this incident, the umpire wasn’t looking for a reason to impact the game. THE KID IMPACTED THE GAME BY NOT ADHERING TO THE RULES. I’m still trying to understand how you wouldn’t call a rule since it’s on the book. I mean, it’s written for a reason. PLEASE TELL ME IF/WHEN YOU WOULD EVER ENFORCE THAT RULE? If not, THEN YOU HAVE AN OPINION ABOUT A WRITTEN RULE AND ARE A POOR EXAMPLE TO THE KIDS FOLLOWING THE RULES...





TO: UK7DOOK3:

You said, "Dusty gained no advantage when he missed the bag. That is the reason it should have been ignored. If a coach is so desparate to win that he would appeal such an infraction, I would have no problem looking him in the eye & saying: "Coach, he caught the corner of the bag with his clete."

Again, you need to go back and read ALL OF THOSE EXAMPLES from 1880-1999 where runners did not have an advantage, BUT were called out or given singles, doubles or triples after hitting HRs because of breaking the rules. Remember, this is the highest level that it is being enforced and you ignore that fact?


YOU WOULD LIE TO THE COACH? Great example to the kids.


You also said, "The coach would know what I was saying. "Get back in the dugout....You ain't gettin' that call from me." In the long run, he would respect that...even if some posters in this thread do not. I guess you have to know the game...."

I do know the game. I lived at minor-league baseball parks growing up, went to spring training and major league games, love AND RESPECT the game for what it is and was, and, even though I don’t like some of the rules, I RESPECT them.

You also said, "Unless the violation is blatant, the best umpires would have been blind to Dusty's alleged mistake."

The best umpires? Then, I guess the best umpires weren’t umping those major and minor league games when they called runners out for missing the bag or gave them singles, doubles, and triples when they passed runners on the basepaths?



One last time:

Your logic, taken to the extreme would create choas, not order.

The reason there is a rule book is to avoid someone’s opinion factoring into the outcome of the game. If the rule needs to be taken out, which is an option, then that’s another arguement. But to say you would have turned your head or lied to the coach had he argued the call to you BY THE RULES, is, in itself, poor judgement and a bad example to the kids playing by the rules.

Stick to the rules in the book, change the rules if you don’t like them, but don’t ignore the rules when they’re there because you think it’s a bad rule.

Remember, your opinion, unlike the rule, is only your opinion, and cheats the players who play by the rules.


I love this forum, and, even though I can't imagine why an umpire would not follow a rule, and instead interject his opinion into a written rule, hopefully, good talks will continue from this...

 

Insider, of course you can list examples of crazy calls, we all can,,,, but that don't make your argument right. We both agree we need rules, but you and I D-E-F-I-N-I-T-L-Y disagree on the part that there are times when umpires should sway from the rules.

You say "never",,,,,,,, I say there "ARE" times. We DEFINITELY disagree, I can live with that. Thank goodness not all umpires share your beliefs...

 

Btw, you say my speed limit analogy is no good unless we have crazed parents at ballgames wanting to shoot umpires,,,,,,, well in my opinion, calls like this will cause parents to WANT to shoot the umps... :banginghe

So I happen to believe my speed limit comparison is very valid. Rules are rules, if you're trying to argue we must follow ALL the rules, then you can't pick and choose the ones you don't like... sorry...

 

This is probably the best thread yet where posters disagree respectfully. Thank you guys for that.

 

Attack is such a harsh way to put it.
I dont recall and i dont think i'm going to take the time to look up all the posts where i have " Attacked " someone.
maybe you can enlighten me, here or PM .. doesnt matter.
:fan_wave2