QS - Julian's job is to make sure the officials are accountable and if they screw up, they need to informed so it doesn't happen again.

 

However, no good boss goes around telling folks that his employees screwed up. He handles it internally. Its no different than a head coach telling the press that they would have won the game had his offensive coordinator had a clue as to how to run a 2-minute offense. While it may be true, the HC doesn't tell it to the press. He handles it internally.

 

Let me qualify the above with the fact that I have no clue if this was really said. I'm speaking in generalities.

 

I understand what you are saying--and agree with most of it. But honestly--I like the fact that he was actually human--and possibly viewed the game in "human" terms.

 

Is JT (or even the KHSAA) responsible for the officials? Officially? I guess. They are certified as officials by the KHSAA. But nearly every coach that I have ever worked with considers them to be independent contractors that work with the KHSAA. I would say that they feel that way because a school pays for the officials for a game--not the KHSAA. Now--the KHSAA may have paid for the officials at this game--but are they under the employ of the KHSAA? Yes--basically as contractual labor.

 

But to that point--why is that when a coach or a player is suspended for misconduct, not following the rules, etc--their name goes on a list that is published on the KHSAA website? (Because they fall under the rules of the KHSAA). How many times have you seen an officials name on the KHSAA website for being suspended? NEVER . . . . . . And I seriously doubt that the KHSAA has any disciplinary powers over officials, umpires, etc.

 

Again--my better sense tells me that things should have been handled differently--but as a coach--it is good to know that an assistant commissioner is, at the very least, seeing things that I didn't normally think that they even pay attention to.

QS, and anyone else for that matter....what was so poorly officiated in the title game? The two calls that have been discussed, (the catcher's balk, which is rarely called at ANY level), and the interference play at second (which I saw with a good angle) that was the right call, though not a popular one. There was a tangle up at third that COULD have been obstruction, but the tangle up was going back to the base,not with the runner trying to advance. In my judgement, it could have been called if the runner had then tried to make it home, but he didn't. But that one was IFFY at best. And, I saw a mechanics error with the ump at second coming to third (with a runner) to make a call with the third base ump standing there (which was definitely the right call BTW). Mechanics errors sometime happen when you go to four man because this is the only time all year that you work with that many umps. They have a two hour class the day before the tournament starts to go over coverages but it's difficult to get in the flow because you have to think quite a bit prior to the play happening (ex. ball hit to right field with runner on first, two outs, I go here, check tag there, watch touch of base here). It's tough because we do it so rarely. We do two man all year, three man in the district, and four man in the regional. And, the plate umpire (who is the umpire in chief for the day) calls the coverages in pregame and not all umps do things the same way. (I know, I know, we should go by the book, but there are options, such as which side of second that the second base umpire should set up on in four man with runners on). So at best, four man is sort of strange, even with a crew that have worked a lot together, which these umpires had not due to being from different regions. But, back to my original point, what was so terrible about the officiating? It appeared to me that the plate ump had a good consistent strike zone. All of the safe-outs I saw appeared to be correct. There was only one banger that I remember at first and I thought the ump got it right. Anyone who was at the finals, weigh in here. What was so bad? I did see a couple of judgement calls in the semi-finals that I thought were booted, but none of them changed the course of either game. I did not see Wednesday or Thursday night's games so I can't comment on them. Where they THAT bad?

VMA - I assume you're an NKY Knothole ump. I'm pretty sure Knothole uses OBR rules, thus, my post above. You would have been taught correctly if you were using FED rules. I know Greg Hall seems to think that the "fielders balk" results in a balk and runner advancement but that's not true if Knothole is using OBR. Let me add one more qualifer: Many leagues use OBR with modifications. While I doubt this would be a Knothole modification, it could. If you're unsure if I'm leading you down the wrong path, ask Greg or whomever is your instructor a)OBR or FED b)if OBR , has Knothole modified the rule and c)if not, have him show you in the rulebook where it results in the runner getting a base.

 

Check OBR Rule 4.03

 

 

4.03

When the ball is put in play at the start of, or during a game, all fielders other than the catcher shall be on fair territory. (a) The catcher shall station himself directly back of the plate. He may leave his position at any time to catch a pitch or make a play except that when the batter is being given an intentional base on balls, the catcher must stand with both feet within the lines of the catcher's box until the ball leaves the pitcher's hand. PENALTY: Balk. (b) The pitcher, while in the act of delivering the ball to the batter, shall take his legal position; © Except the pitcher and the catcher, any fielder may station himself anywhere in fair territory; (d) Except the batter, or a runner attempting to score, no offensive player shall cross the catcher's lines when the ball is in play.

Anyone else have a feeling there will be an increase in catchers balks next year in High School Baseball in the state of Ky?

Sandman,

Your #2 and #3 are actually catcher's obstruction, not a catcher's balk. The difference is that a catcher's balk is an immediate dead ball, and a catcher's obstruction call is a delayed dead ball. In a catcher's obstruction call, it may be ignored (if everyone including the batter advance at least one base), or if there is a play, the offense may decide to accept the play rather than the award.

 

They weren't my number two and three, I quoted someone else. If you had read my post, instead of just copying it, you would have seen I spelled out the catchers balk. It's really not nearly as complicated as you guys want to pretend.

SM - I completely agree. That's not the debate at hand.

 

Funny, I thought we were talking about a catcher's balk. If the catcher left the box before the ball was pitched, balk, if not, well...not.

 

Somehow most of my posts get lost in all these symantics I guess. It's really not that complicated. Certainly, doesn't take 80 plus posts to say what I said in the first graph.

Shirley the rule doesn't state that you can not slide past the base at all. If so, they need to amend that.

 

Let me ask you this, what if he does a pop up slide? They would've called interference anyway. In other words, you can only slide into the bag, with your feet touching the front of the bag and have to stay on the ground, correct?

It doesn't matter what type of slide. It's the contact that the umpire has to judge as interference or not. The runner was outside the base path (for whatever reason) and made contact with the fielder. In his judgement (and correctly so), the umpire said that the contact at that point prevented the fielder from making a play on the batter-runner, and declared him out.

It doesn't matter what type of slide. It's the contact that the umpire has to judge as interference or not. The runner was outside the base path (for whatever reason) and made contact with the fielder. In his judgement (and correctly so), the umpire said that the contact at that point prevented the fielder from making a play on the batter-runner, and declared him out.

 

I'm guessing you didn't see the play than. No attempt was made, he was in the baseline and if contact was made, IMO it was because the second baseman did nothing to avoid it. PM was play good, solid baseball and got penalized for it...bottom line.

SM, remember I don't write the rules, I just enforce them!

 

I'm still blaming you...

Funny, I thought we were talking about a catcher's balk. If the catcher left the box before the ball was pitched, balk, if not, well...not.

 

 

SM - your statement has a lot of holes in it.

Check OBR Rule 4.03

 

 

4.03

When the ball is put in play at the start of, or during a game, all fielders other than the catcher shall be on fair territory. (a) The catcher shall station himself directly back of the plate. He may leave his position at any time to catch a pitch or make a play except that when the batter is being given an intentional base on balls, the catcher must stand with both feet within the lines of the catcher's box until the ball leaves the pitcher's hand. PENALTY: Balk. (b) The pitcher, while in the act of delivering the ball to the batter, shall take his legal position; © Except the pitcher and the catcher, any fielder may station himself anywhere in fair territory; (d) Except the batter, or a runner attempting to score, no offensive player shall cross the catcher's lines when the ball is in play.

 

VMA - I assume you are using the penalty in 4.03a as your supporting evidence for a fielder that is in foul territory resulting in a balk. Unfortunately, that penalty only deals with leaving too early on an intentional walk. It has nothing to do with what you are arguing. There is no penalty for the 'fielder's balk' in OBR.

I'm guessing you didn't see the play than. No attempt was made, he was in the baseline and if contact was made, IMO it was because the second baseman did nothing to avoid it. PM was play good, solid baseball and got penalized for it...bottom line.

You guessed incorrectly. Saw it up pretty clearly, have seen it several times since then on tape. He went past the base, no matter how slightly, made contact with the fielder outside the baseline, and the official IMO, correctly ruled interference. It may be "good, solid baseball" as you say, but it was illegal and was correctly enforced...bottom line.

Like I said, I didn't see the call and apparently the 4 umpires did not either.

 

I assume, like a pitchers balk, any of the 4 could have made the call. And as far as interference at the bases, I have seen that more this year then ever before. In fact, in a 5-3 rally stopper against Trinity, blue called the interference at second when the piviot man actually stepped right in front of the base and into the slide instead of behind the bag or off to the side.

Just a question! If there where 4 umps and none of those guys saw the play., then WHO called it and why the disscusion?? Am I missing something here?? Maybe I have to reread this thread more carefully.

Just a question! If there where 4 umps and none of those guys saw the play., then WHO called it and why the disscusion?? Am I missing something here?? Maybe I have to reread this thread more carefully.

 

Coach Myerhoff "suggested" to the umpire that it had occurred.

Coach Myerhoff "suggested" to the umpire that it had occurred.

 

Bob suggested?