Ask MrUmp1 your rules question.

[allstarmom]

I have one because it happened to us this past weekend.  Runner at third.  Batter hits grounder, fielder throws to home, catcher makes the play, umpire calls runner out for 3rd out.  All the boys start running off the field and then the umpire changes his mind and calls runner safe.  In the confusion of the moment batter continues to run to second.  First of all, since ump called runner out can he change his mind (catcher did not drop the ball) and if so, should batter have had to go back to first?

[MrUmp1]

Since I was not there, I do not know why the Umpire may have changed his mind. Maybe the catcher didnt even try to tag the runner and the umpire got confused and thought it was a force play. The umpire has the right to change his call and if he does then he would place runners where they would have been if the was not the confusion of a change call. Thats why I am sure he didn't let the runner go to 2nd. I do not what level of ball this happened at but just remember, in summer league it could be just a volunteer ump.

[allstarmom]

I dont know why he changed his mind, but he allowed the runner to advance and stay at 2nd base.  It was in the13yo East Texas State Championship game for Babe Ruth.  It was the last inning and the run he called safe was the go-ahead run.  Dont know if it lost the game for us, but it definitely changed the momentum.  He also would not allow us to protest the runner at 2nd.

[besbolbenbedygud]

Mr Ump.....I'm assuming also... ;D (did not see it).....but this sounds a lot like the Vidor/PNG call................ and with it being the third out and both teams are moving off the field........that would indicate all is dead at the third out call (at the moment the call was made).  If runner who hit the ball was running, at best he's rounding first base but not at second base........throw was from third to the plate........  I would say runner would be put on first base with two outs??   

My question would be how quick was the call changed?? was play completely stopped and questioned before he changed it, or was it done by himself on his own right after the out call?

Tough play buy with two outs I would have been praying he went to first with the ball.........there you have a force...........lots can happen with a tag play.......this case being an example

[MrUmp1]

Sometimes you just have to be there to see it for yourself to understand what happened. Picture is worth a thousand words.

[besbolbenbedygud]

[WOSMustangs09]

Is a player always ejected for running over the catcher at a play at home?

[MrUmp1]

If a runner runs over a catcher or any other fielder and it is deemed malicious, then he is ejected. Ok you ask what is malicious? First if he puts a shoulder down that is malicious. If he could have avoided the contact and just doesn't it could be malicious. Lets say a runner is running twords home and the throw takes the catcher over into the path of the runner. There may be a collision but not malicious because it was unavoidable. Best thing is.. if you are the runner and can avoid contact then do it. Do not leave the choice up to the Umpire because he may see it from a different angle or only catch then end of the play and eject the runner. Any level other than the pros,  do anything you can to prevent a player from getting hurt.

[Guest Jack Nasty]

Right handed batter in the box, base runner at second attempts to steal third, if the batter gets out of the box and interferes with the catcher's attempt at the runner he is charged with interference. Is he also charged with interference if he stays in the box and the catcher, say, hits his bat with the ball while throwing?

[MrUmp1]

As long as the batter stays in his batting stance and does not move into the way of the catchers throw there is no interference. So .. catcher throws the ball and hits the batters bat and the batter did not move, you have nothing. Batter is entitled to remain in the box as long as he does not move to alter the play. As an umpire if this happens I will have to explain to one or coach or the other because both will think they are right.

[AggiesAreWe]

When does an umpire deem it necessary to change the strike zone in the middle of a game? and I am not talking Little League. :

[MrUmp1]

That is not something that we teach in our chapter. The game should play out however it is. If some guys take it upon themselves to do such then that is their call and would have to answer for that to a coach. If the score is 20-0 I may call any ball close to a strike a strike to help get the game over but I am not talking about calling a pitch at the head level or toe level a strike. What you may not know is, I have had coaches ask me to open up the zone to get a game over and both know about it before that happens. We teach that we as umpires or there to call the game as it is played and to be professional. All I can say is if you decide on your own to do something like that, then be prepaired to answer for the whys.

[AggiesAreWe]

That is not something that we teach in our chapter. The game should play out however it is. If some guys take it upon themselves to do such then that is their call and would have to answer for that to a coach. If the score is 20-0 I may call any ball close to a strike a strike to help get the game over but I am not talking about calling a pitch at the head level or toe level a strike. What you may not know is, I have had coaches ask me to open up the zone to get a game over and both know about it before that happens. We teach that we as umpires or there to call the game as it is played and to be professional. All I can say is if you decide on your own to do something like that, then be prepaired to answer for the whys.

Yep, that's what "they" tell me. :

[DAMan]

You are correct Pants.... I would think it would be very rare that a ball could have been played by one infielder, passes him hits a runner, and another infielder could have still made a play. Of course the ball can bounce in some strange ways. I blame it on global warming.

In baseball, is it another infielder, or another fielder - could have made a play?

[MrUmp1]

You are correct Pants.... I would think it would be very rare that a ball could have been played by one infielder, passes him hits a runner, and another infielder could have still made a play. Of course the ball can bounce in some strange ways. I blame it on global warming.

In baseball, is it another infielder, or another fielder - could have made a play?

If the book says fielder, it still means an infielder. The pitcher does not count in this.

[DAMan]

You are correct Pants.... I would think it would be very rare that a ball could have been played by one infielder, passes him hits a runner, and another infielder could have still made a play. Of course the ball can bounce in some strange ways. I blame it on global warming.

In baseball, is it another infielder, or another fielder - could have made a play?

If the book says fielder, it still means an infielder. The pitcher does not count in this.

Agree however, an outfielder playing in close could have a play.

[DAMan]

Scenario:

Runner on 2nd

Pop up hit to SS (in the so called baseline)

Runner on 2nd runs into the SS before SS has opportunity to make catch

Runner is out on obstruction, he needs to run behind or in front of the SS.

Runner do not obstruct.  They intefer.  Fielders Obstruct.

[topgun95]

I'm not sure if this has been asked but here it goes... A batter is at the plate, the pitcher throws one in the dirt that bounces up and hits the batter in the leg while still in the box. What is the call?

[MrUmp1]

He gets to take his base as long as he did not make a move twords the ball to get hit. Rule book says a batter must make an attempt to get out of the way. Just because it hits the dirt does not mean that all bets are off as far as a penalty for being hit.

[oldman]

The states the batter must make an attempt to get out of the way.  If a batter moves his elbow over the plate to get hit I am going to call it a strike ( as long as it is over the zone ) and tell the batter to get back in the box ( unless the strike is # 3 ) .  If the ball is coming directly at the batter and he doesn't move or do anything to make the ball hit him then I am giving him 1st base.  In my opinion the pitcher made the mistake of not throwing the ball over the plate and hitting the batter.  If you make the batter stay in that situation then you are allowing the pitcher to get away with a mistake.

[643]

Sorry Oldman BUT opinions does not matter in BB, the rules plainly states "if the ball is outside the strike zone it is to be called a ball if no attempt was made to avoid being hit" no judgement call here...WW

[MrUmp1]

Oldman did say if it hit his elbow and it was in the strike zone he would call a strike which is correct. He stated the situation correctly. Just remember a stike zone is an opinion !!!!!!

[topgun95]

Well to clear it up a little, the ball hit the batter in the back of the leg as he tried to get out of the way. The ump called the ball dead and made him stay at the plate.

[oldman]

643.....Opinions do matter.  It is a judgement call all the way.  It is the umpires judgement on where the batter makes an attempt or not.  If I am working a game and the batter doesn't do anything to cause the ball to hit him I am awarding him first base.  You will find that most umpire chapters will come to the same decision.  Didn't make the state convention this year , but I was told there was lots of discussion on everyone being on the same page on certain situations........

[643]

Dennis I do agree IF the balls in the zone BUT he also said if the ball was outside zone and the batter made NO attempt to avoid being hit he would award the batter first, THIS IS NOT JUDGMENT, sorry but the batter, according to the >>rules<<MUST make an attempt to avoid being hit,>> BALL or STRIKE. I do and have always wanted any ump to just go by the rules, if I was the coach and this happened I would be asking for time before the batter/runner got out of the box, and Dennis you know this is true about me...BTW how could ANY chapter aprove something thats contrary to what the book clearly states...WW