rulesman09

On 12/21/2018 at 11:33 PM, threeball said:

This exact call was called in tonight's game I was at.  It was clear the player didn't intend to dribble, or have control.  He was slapping at the ball from an errant pass by a teammate and then picked it up to gain control.  Then when he dribbled it was called a double dribble.  I agree, it could be called that.  Probably should be.  But it was clear there was no control or intent.  So, I guess it comes down to being basically a judgement for the official on whether has control or not. 

This exact play is covered by the NFHS Case Book and is not a double dribble. 

4.15.1 SITUATION B: A1's throw in pass is beyond A2. (a) A2 reaches out and slaps the ball toward A's basket; or (b) A2 muffs the pass. In both situations, A2 then gains control and dribbles to the basket and scores. RULING: No violation in either (a) or (b). 

One more thing, about the three pointer at the buzzer. That was exactly the correct call by the official. Look up the rules.....any ball can not be caught and shot with under .5 of a second....it can only be tipped in that instance. There was .2 on the clock which means only a tipped ball would have counted and I'm sure the refs were aware of that beforehand.

 

Kaz

Don't want to get in the habit of splitting hairs, but if the clock shows 0.3 or less, it must be a tip (NFHS 5-2-5). The gentleman escorted off didn't understand this and was listening for the horn. As soon as she caught the ball, the official was waving it off. Doesn't matter whether the clock starts or not.

You all really have me in the rule book today. In HS, no basket can be scored on a player control foul, no matter when the ball was released. Case Book 6-7-4: Airborne A1 releases the ball on a try and illegally contacts B1 while returning to the floor. The ball goes through the basket. RULING: Airborne A1's foul immediately causes the ball to become dead. No goal can be scored, even if the ball had gone through the basket before the foul occurred. NCAA Men do it differently.

Not just what referees have been instructed to do, it's a rule. From the NFHS Case Book 4-19-8©: A1 drives and releases on a try. Contact between A1 and B1 occurs after the release but before A1 returns to the floor. One official rules a charge, and the other rules a block. RULING: The foul by A1 is not considered a player control foul, but half of a double foul, therefore the ball doesn't become dead on the try. If the basket is successful, count the goal and resume from the point of interruption, which is a throw in for team B along the baseline. If it's no good, the POI is a try in flight, and the arrow is used. Hope this clears up the situation.

NFHS 8-3-3(d): "Each runner is awarded...one base if a pitch or any throw by a pitcher from his pitching position on the plate goes into a stand or bleacher or over or through any fence...or lodges in an umpire's or catcher's equipment."

In terms of scoring:

"A wild pitch shall be charged to the pitcher when a ball delivered to the batter is so high or so low (including any pitch that touches the ground in front of home plate), or so far away from home plate that the catcher does not stop or control it with ordinary effort so that the batter runner advances to first or any runner advances a base. When the catcher enables a runner, other than the batter-runner, to advance by failing to control a pitch he should have been able to, it is...a "passed ball."

All in good humor, but just happened to have my bag in the truck. The OBR is as you described, though.

From OBR rule set but applicable in all rule sets including Fed.

8.05d "It is a balk when"

The pitcher, while touching his plate, throws, or feints a throw to an unoccupied base, except for the purpose of making a okay.

 

The accepted interpretation is that if the runner is stealing, than the pitcher can throw ahead of the runner while still on the rubber for "the purpose of making a play". Driving back the runner is not considered making a play in this instance.

 

If the runner fakes a steal and the pitcher while still on the rubber throws ahead of him to an unoccupied base, then it is a balk.

 

I think this is just one of those misunderstood rules.

Let's check out the 2013 NFHS interpretation:

Situation 20: With runners at 1st base and 2nd base, the runner at 2nd bluffs a steal of third by running hard to 3rd base before he stops and retreats to 2nd. The pitcher, seeing the runner take off hard to 3rd base, legally throws to the unoccupied 3rd base. The third base coach wants a balk called because the runner from 2nd stopped.

Ruling: A pitcher may throw or feint a throw to an unoccupied base in an attempt to put out or drive back a runner. As long as the umpire judges that it is reasonable for the pitcher to believe that he had a play at third, even though the runner stopped, it is a legal move. (6.2.4b)

Correct on the fact that it is misunderstood.

I have no idea what your talking about. Yes I do no the rules, yes most fans are idiots. Don't know little Johnny. When a runner steals second, and the pitcher turns and throws to second with out steping off 1st, its a baulk. A ump should never shout Fair Ball! When a pitcher steps off and looks over at 1st and and looks at the runner hard then raise his arm like he is going to throw over an't a baulk. I could keep going and going and going. Had a vet ump this weekend talk to me about this he said we can teach them, go thru meetings but we can't go out there and hold there hands. Give it up Blue and you are.... you got some weak holes in some of your crews, even some of your own kind say so.

Actually, a pitcher can throw to an unoccupied base if it's in an effort to drive back a runner.

I was standing about 15 feet from home plate looking directly down the 3rd base line. From that angle it looked like the ball crossed directly over the bag before going into foul terrotory, and thus, SHOULD have been called a fair ball. The problem is the umpire whose call it was screams "foul ball" and waves it foul. In my years of coaching, if any umpire calls it foul, it IS foul and a dead ball because the advantage gained by the batting team would be too great. As I mentioned earlier, the 3rd base umpire went running down the line calling it foul and waving his arms to indicate dead ball. While it would be ideal for the outfielder to continue to play the ball, I cannot fault a high school player for believing the closest umpire when he yells foul ball.

 

The balk occurred after that runner was bunted to 3rd. With an 0-2 count, Livingston Academy's hitter stepped in to the box, waited until the pitcher was mid-way through his delivery and jumped out of the box, waving his arms and screaming "TIME TIME TIME." Notre Dame's pitcher did not complete his delivery. Thus, the balk was called.

NFHS 6-2-4-d(1)

If the pitcher, with a runner on base, stops or hesitates in his delivery because the batter steps out of the box with (a)one foot or (b)both feet or ©holds up his hand to request "time," it shall not be a balk. in (a) and ©,there is no penalty on either the batter or the pitcher. The umpire shall call "time" and begin play anew. In (b)a strike shall be called on the batter for violation of 7-3-1 (leaving the box during an at-bat.) in (a), (b)and©, if the pitcher legally delivers the ball, it shall be called a strike and the ball remains live. Thus, two strikes are called on the batter in (b. If the umpire judges the batter's actions to deliberately create a balk, he will penalize according to 3-3-1 (o).

Isn't umpiring easy? Lol.

A grounder down left field? When did it start "grounding" in the infield? Over 3rd base? I "think" the homeplate/head umpire can over rule a call in the field. An umpire should signal fair or foul and not yell, since fair can sound like foul and vice versa. I would have my outfielder always play as if the ball were fair - especially in a 2-2 game. In this case, take nothing for granted. Wondering who called the balk? Tough way to lose a game unless the balk was obvious.

NFHS 10-1-4

No umpire shall criticize or interfere with another umpire's decision unless asked by the one making it.

In the Notre Dame-Livingston Academy game, the score is tied 2-2 in the 8th. We have three umpires handling this game. One is stationed down the third base line about ten feet from the bag. Livingston Academy's batter hits a grounder down the left field line, and the third base umpire screams "foul ball" and waves his arms indicating the ball was foul. The home plate umpire points fair, but does not say anything. Notre Dame's left fielder, hearing "foul ball" does not play the ball. Livingston Academy runner takes second. Home plate umpire and third base umpire converse. Then they call over the first base umpire who had no angle whatsoever. They then say that the ball was fair and the runner remains at second. He, of course, scored the winning run on a balk. Thoughts?

NFHS 2-16-1:

A foul is a batted ball:

e. that touches the ground after being inadvertently declared foul by an umpire.

NFHS Officials Manual pg. 19

Calling foul halts all play. It is not reversible.

It is a tough call for the plate umpire, but in terms of HS mechanics, it is his call. NFHS Umpires' Manual pg. 32( XII Game Situations (9):

DOUBLE PLAY(INTERFERENCE CALL AT 2ND BASE). Since U2 has both out calls at 2nd and at 1st in a two-man system, he must turn with the throw to first in order to make the call there. U1 must move out to watch the play at 2nd base for possible illegal slides or runner interference. If, in the judgment of U1, the runner at 2nd interferes AND prevented a possible play at first, then the batter-runner shall also be called out.

I can understand U2 rotating down to home while U1 goes up the 3rd base line on a bases empty triple. I don't see how U1 has interference on say, the outfield side of 2nd base. U2 is in B position. He is right there. Interference after the touch at 2nd and the relay to first is after the fact anyway. Isn't U2 following the flight of the ball from second to first? What interference happens after the ball is released? I can see U1 having obstruction or touches on 3rd and foot off the bag and bobbles at first. Even tags and touches on 2nd when U2 goes out. I don't see how he sees interference at 2nd on a double play ball. I don't think I ever will. Maybe a conference between blues where they both ask 'what did you see?', but I don't see U1 calling interference on that play when U2 is right there watching it all.

 

Thanks for the explanation. Two man crews are tough and require good rotations and mechanics and communication. I think a no call is the best you're going to get if you're expecting most U1's to make an interference call from halfway up the third base line.

Good post. If the officiating in the quarterfinals is any indication of how the rest of the tournament will be called, they're gonna let them play. There was plenty of hand checking, pushing underneath the boards, and hip/body checking that went uncalled in the Harriman/Oneida game. And it went both ways, but Harriman was more physical early before Oneida adjusted. Oh, but there were lots of walking violations called. No one and I mean NO ONE got away with steps. I think they even called a walk on the clock keeper at one point. I lost count, but I don't think I'm wrong in saying that there were 12 walks called against Harriman's Xavier Howard, alone. He still had a good game, but it took him out of his game, somewhat. Oneida held the Blue Devils to 41 and X had 20. Granted, I thought several of the calls were legit, but there were some that I had no idea what the officials were seeing. It seemed like they didn't allow any step-through-jump-stop moves and spin moves had to have a dribble all the way through the spin. Of course, it also looked like they called a walk if a player just went a long distance for a layup, even if it was only two steps. We'll just have to see what happens.

 

As for predictions, I hate them. There are going to be two very good games on Tuesday night and I am looking forward to it. I'm nervous, too. I know Rockwood has a great team and a fantastic coach. But hey, Oneida is pretty good, too. And I would put Yaden and Wright up against any coaches around. They've had some great game plans against Sunbright, Wartburg, and Harriman and nearly ran the table in those games. Wartburg had to play, and I'm quoting a Wartburg fan/"expert", their best game of the year to beat the Indians by 3 and Oneida had a shot on the rim to tie at the end. I'm sure Rockwood remembers last year, but I am also sure they are like Oneida and aren't that worried about last year. Rockwood will be ready just like Oneida will be. It should be a good one.

 

Congratulations to Cole West on scoring his 1,000th point during the D4A C-ship game. Cole is only a Sophomore and was playing in his 64th game when he hit the first bucket of the game for OHS and gave himself 1,000 points in his career. Not bad. We are all hoping Cole can stay healthy and continue his high school career and pursue the all-time scoring title at Oneida while he leads the team to as many wins and as far as possible. Way to go Cole.

 

Good Luck Indians. Let's make this an all District 4 finals in Region 2.

Would 2 steps not be considered a travel? Just flipping through topics on here, and that caught my eye.

There is a responsibility on the umpires. Their job is to inspect all the bats that each team provides for the pregame inspection. This is supposed to be all of the bats, helmets, and catcher's equipment that each team plans to use. Umpires are not to dig through bat bags or prod each coach to provide every piece of equipment, when they ask each coach at the plate conference whether the team is legally equipped, the burden is back on coaches and players. At that point, the umpires are responsible for enforcing the illegal bat rule. NFHS 7-4-1: "A batter is out as in above penalty or when: a) the batter enters the batter's box with an illegal bat or is discovered having used an illegal bat. If the infraction is discovered before the next pitch following the turn at bat of the player who used an illegal bat, the defense may take the penalty or the result of the play." The other bat that is a legal comp is a "Combat" brand name.

There is some responsibility on the umpires to check the bats. It can't just be on the coaches. If little Johnny got smacked in the forehead from a ball hit off an Easton bat, some jerk lawyer will try to say its the coach's AND umpire's fault.

 

I know the Demarini and Louisville Slugger comp bats are legal. I think there's one more. Easton is NOT.

 

If a player came to the plate and got a hit with an illegal bat that had been hid during inspection, the batter should be called out upon discovery.

 

It is my understanding that the NFHS had planned to make ALL comp bats illegal this year. The reasoning was because some of the bats actually got hotter the more they were hit. The companies whose bats were deemed legal showed statistics and documentation that their bats did NOT become hotter and were therefore deemed legal.

 

I have heard several stories of mad mommies and daddies who paid $400+ for an Easton comp and they can't use it. However, it is also my understanding that next year the only bats that will be legal are aluminum or wood. All comp bats will be illegal, no exceptions.

The illegal bat issue is a confusing one, as this year is the transition year between the BESR standard and the new BBCOR standard that takes effect in 2012. The list of comp bats that are illegal and legal is found on TSSAA's website, as you suggested. This list is also an ever-evolving one, as manufacturers can apply for a waiver if they can prove that their bat can meet the standards. During the pregame bat inspection, umpires are looking for that BESR logo, not cross-checking each bat against the list. It is up to coaches and players to know whether the bat they are using is illegal. When a question arises as to the legality of a particular bat, that is when the umpire can reference the list and make a ruling. I'm not saying that the umpires are excused from the responsibility of enforcing the bat rule when they know a bat is illegal, just saying that coaches and players have a lot of responsibilty this year in terms of knowing when they are using a legal bat.

Yes, the Easton comp bats do have a BESR stamp. My son had 2 just like the ones that were used last night. The bats were approved originally by BESR standards but after further testing were found to get "hotter" after a lot of use. This is why you were hearing of the term "bat rolling". It all started with Cody Hawn of Tennessee hitting a 500+ bomb on Vandy & Vandy's Coach Corbin brought it to the attention of the NCAA. The comps were ruled illegal for post season play, then after testing, illegal period for college. High School follwed the NFHS standards where the Eastons failed the "new" BESR testing.

 

I am curious why there have been no Umps post a reply yet. Maybe a little early in the post, but I have seen where they jump all over a post about bad calling quickly. To me, if the rule clearly states this on the TSSAA Website, and the ump does not follow the rule, this falls under "bad Umping". I know it is confusing, but the umps should clearly know what TSSAA wants enforced, right?

Just to clear up any confusion on whether the buzzer or the clock is more important at the end of the game:

NFHS Case Book Situation 5.6

A1 is fouled in the act of shooting by B1...When the foul occurs, the clock is stopped with 00:00 showing, but no end-of-period signal(horn or light) has indicated. Ruling: A1 will attempt the free throws with the lane spaces occupied as required. The fourth period time has not expired until the period-ending signal.

You do realize there are three officials, it only takes one referee to watch the shot for a foul or travel or any other call. (By the way a travel would not have been the right call there even if he did walk a little) Anybody who knows basketball will agree that that the game clock determines the end of the game not the buzzer. In that situation with not much time and the gym being loud at least one referee has to have an eye on the clock.

 

I made those arguments only to express to you that the buzzer is not what is important. Where you’re really wrong is your quote "If the horn did sound at the proper time, then the shot is definitely off in time. (But again, I'm not sure that happened)" I am assuming your basing that off of the YouTube cell phone video which was taken in the middle of a loud Gallatin student section. I have watched the game film (recorded by an actual video camera set up on the second section away from most noise) and on that video there is no doubt the buzzer goes off before the shot. Pretty simple to me.

Is that the NFHS Rules Book for Basketball that you are referring to?

So once again i must state that i posted the same message several times because it was appropriate as a response. Reading is fundmental my friend! Now if you must know I was fortunate enough to have college paid for because of this beloved sport and having said that i am wondering how much you understand officiating. Because if you did you would know that there is one point in the game where logic must prevail and that is at the end of the game on buzzer beaters. Officials have the right to take as long as they need to make decision on buzzer beaters where they would typically congregate and discuss the call. Please read the TSSAA Rule book for officials I believe it is on page 62 Section 2 Rule #23 I believe. I can cofirm that for you if you would like! Kids get to be more emotional than adults once again that is this thing called "life"! As far as teaching the kids i would prefer to give mine this nugget "that a man/woman treats triumph and defeat the same and explain to him/her what that actually means! But just the like poem written by Rudyard Kipling I can’t help but ponder on the “IFâ€! What if three men held steadfast to their responsibility and did not waiver, what would have been the HONEST outcome! As someone who played the game I would also recommend not even mentioning the officials to your children I would recommend asking for the stat sheet and then count turnovers, missed free throws, shooting percentage, and deficit recovery! But what i will not do is let adults not hold other adults accountable for their mistakes. I am getting expensive with these lessons! hehehehehehehehe! As far as using the site I am not too concerned as long as you get my message. Sincerely, The Rookie Of The Year

so according to this if you get called for a flagrant foul in the officials judgement it was a striking act

If it was a striking act, then yes, it would be correctly judged as a flagrant foul. But the book also says, "involves, but isn't limited to." That's where each official's judgment of all the factors comes into play.

what would constitute a flagrant foul....we had an intentional foul called not flagrant...so what are the differences

NFHS 4-19, 3 and 4(I'll paraphrase):

An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul that neutralizes an opponent's obvious advantageous position. Contact away from the ball, or not playing the ball or a player specifically designed to keep the clock from starting, is intentional. They may or may not be premeditated, and aren't based solely on the severity of the act.

A flagrant foul may be a personal or technical foul of a violent or savage nature, or a technical noncontact foul which displays unacceptable conduct. It may or may not be intentional. If personal, it involves, but is not limited to violent contact such as: striking, kicking, and kneeing. If technical, it involves dead-ball contact or noncontact at any time which is extreme or persistent, vulgar or abusive conduct. Fighting is a flagrant act.

Hope that clears it up a little.

No actual rule on the time it takes other than NFHS 5-2-5: " when play is resumed with a throw-in or free throw and three-tenths (.3) of a second or less remains on the clock, a player may not gain control of the ball and try for a field goal. In this situation, only a tap could score." The .5 makes it the referee's judgment, and as long as the ball left the shooter's hand before the horn, the shot would count. If you think about it, the referee sees the ball touch the shooter's hand, processes this, drops his arm, then the scorer sees the referee drop the arm, processes it, and hits the clock start. Unless it's an atomic clock, there's gotta be some sort of delay on that as well. Put all these things together, which you can't account for with no replay, and it's definitely more than the .5 that shows on the clock. It's called "human error." I don't want to be an apologist for the refs (or the scorekeeper, for that matter) but there's really nothing you can do about the natural delay that will happen. I did see the game, and from where I was sitting, the ball was out of his hand before the horn went off. Regardless, a game that you hate to see anyone lose.

Great game tonight at CHS. With .5 seconds in regulation a Cocke Co player got the ball on the inbounds down by 3 points and shot it from 80 feet,swish! The refs counted the basket and OT began. Cherokee won the game in OT. The referee crew had a bad game. They lost control of the game early and it seemed as if they were not working together. My question is : is there an actual rule about how many seconds it takes to take a shot? If not this was an eighty foot tip-in!

So is this saying in the SAME inning? A pitcher cannot return later in the game? Or does this say you can switch back and forth between pitchers in every inning if you want, but only 1 time per inning?

As long as the return as pitcher does not violate the pitching, substitution, or charged conference rule he can return later in the game. Obviously if he was a substitute that had entered the game and then been removed from the game he could not reenter. But your starting pitcher is governed by the reentry rule so if he is removed from the game he may reenter. If your pitcher never leaves the game and he is taken off the mound to play center field in the second innning then he could return that inning to pich and then leave to play center again. That is the one time per inning. But he could also be taken off the mound as you describe it in the second inning, go play center and then return in the fifth. That may help but if its not clear then I'll try to do better.

Only the starting pitcher may re-enter as the pitcher (doesn't matter if he moves to another position or comes out). For anyone who came on in relief, once they are taken off the mound, they cannot pitch again that game.

NFHS 3-1-2 A player may be removed as pitcher and returned as pitcher only once per inning, provided the pitcher does not violate either the pitching, substitution or charged conference rule.

Lets check out NFHS Baseball Casebook page 70

8.3.2

Situation L

R1 is advancing on the pitch and F6 drops to a knee while taking the throw, partially blocking the inside of the base. R1 slides to the inside edge of the base, contacts F6's knee, and is then tagged out. The head coach argues that this is obstruction.

Ruling:

This is not obstruction as F6 did provide access to part of second base, even though it was not the part of the base that R1 wanted or believed was most advantageous.

if you are denying any part of the bag it is denying access arent you ?...

not the way that i look at it. Just because you are denying access to half the bag the runner still has access to the other so half of the bag.

in HIGH SCHOOL about 2 years ago the emphasised the rule that the runner must have access to the ENTIRE bag unless the feilder has the ball no part of the bag could be blocked without the ball

the rule you state is a pro rule and in high school it is different

the reason that i ask is because in the definition of obstruction all it mentions is that the fielder without possession of the ball denies access to the base the runner is attempting to achieve. It doesn't mention anything about a part of the bag. Thoughts?