Unusual plays

Rice4HOF

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 21, 2002
1,905
Calgary, Canada
So, that play is subject to a very heavy debate by umpires, as I understand it. The debate is over whether or not to alert the manager that he has a choice. Somewhere in some officials forums or internet thing, there was a very active debate, with the prevailing view being that because of the language of the rule or comment, it is up to the manager to know the rule. So the umpire enforces the catchers' interference and then needs to wait to see what the manager wants to do. Others take the view that in situations where the manager may prefer to decline. The MLB comment gives two examples -- sac fly and sac bunt.

Do you know how the ump handled in the reds pads game?
As an umpire you are not to alert the manager (like in football where you’re asked if you want to accept or decline the penalty), but if the manager comes outs and says pretty much anything (e.g. “do we have to lose that run?”), then we help him with the rule and let him know he has a choice. In other words, the manager does not need to explicitly tell us “hey I want to use the option of declining the interference and taking the result of the play”, but we also don’t call time and say “hey, coach, do you want to take the penalty or not.”
 

SumnerH

Malt Liquor Picker
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
32,286
Asheville, NC
Rulebook wording “if in contact with its intended place on the person” or something like that. If you dive head first and your helmet is the only thing on the base, that’s fine.
Yeah. From Definitions of Terms:

TOUCH. To touch a player or umpire is to touch any part of his body, or any uniform or equipment worn by him (but not any jewelry (e.g., necklaces, bracelets, etc.) worn by a player).​
(Touch) Comment: Equipment shall be considered worn by a player or umpire if it is in contact with its intended place on his person.
 

pedro1918

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
5,205
Map Ref. 41°N 93°W
I have a friend who is the head coach of a DC High School baseball team. His team was in second place in the conference and needed the last place team to beat the first place team to win the conference.

Good news: The last place team used three different pitchers to no-hit the first place team.

The bad news: Those pitchers walked 19 batters.

Add in a few errors and the first place team won 7-0.

7IP, 0 Hits allowed, 19 BB allowed, 7 Runs allowed.
 

BroodsSexton

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 4, 2006
12,936
guam
Rulebook wording “if in contact with its intended place on the person” or something like that. If you dive head first and your helmet is the only thing on the base, that’s fine.
I laughed picturing the guy diving in head first with his hands by his side, and helmet touching the bag.
 

Sad Sam Jones

Member
SoSH Member
May 5, 2017
2,676
Rafael Devers' cousin Jose won a game for Lake County (Guardians Hi-A) in a run-down walk-off as part of a 9-2-5-2-5, E-5. The batter was Justin Boyd – the garbage player they traded Will Benson for.

 

santadevil

wears depends
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
6,593
Saskatchestan
Yeah. From Definitions of Terms:

TOUCH. To touch a player or umpire is to touch any part of his body, or any uniform or equipment worn by him (but not any jewelry (e.g., necklaces, bracelets, etc.) worn by a player).​
(Touch) Comment: Equipment shall be considered worn by a player or umpire if it is in contact with its intended place on his person.
So, was this rule applied incorrectly last Fall?
https://youtube.com/shorts/v5wB3bnQynI?si=nakEZ3XvrW6OP7TS

Tagged the batting glove hanging out of the pocket
 

Whoop-La White

used to be zougwa
SoSH Member
So, was this rule applied incorrectly last Fall?
https://youtube.com/shorts/v5wB3bnQynI?si=nakEZ3XvrW6OP7TS

Tagged the batting glove hanging out of the pocket
That's a great question. At first the obvious answer seems like it should be no--the glove's "intended place" is on the hand, not in the pocket.

But that's when he's batting. It's not unusual for the runner to place the gloves in the pocket when he transitions to his role as runner. Which makes "sticking out of the pocket" the new "intended place on the person." Semien certainly placed them there with intent.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
8,209
Boston, MA
Who was it that would intentionally leave his batting gloves hanging out of his back pocket so they could wave goodbye to the first baseman when he was stealing second? It sounds like Rickey, but I don't think it was him.
 

The Gray Eagle

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
17,247
Who was it that would intentionally leave his batting gloves hanging out of his back pocket so they could wave goodbye to the first baseman when he was stealing second? It sounds like Rickey, but I don't think it was him.
That was Mel Hall:
https://fpbaseballoutsider.blogspot.com/2009/06/bye-bye-mel-hall.html
The thing I really remember about Hall was his habit of stuffing a bunch of extra batting gloves in his rear pocket with the fingers dangling out. The idea was that when he was running around the bases, the gloves would be waving bye-bye to the infielders.
I hadn't heard about the awful and disturbing turn his story took a few years ago:
Now we can all wave bye-bye to Hall. On Wednesday he got a 45-year sentence for raping a 12-year-old girl, a player on a basketball team he coached. There was testimony from other women who said he molested or raped them as minors; some of this activity is said to have occurred during his playing days. He's been charged in at least one of those cases too.
Hall is 48 now; he won't be eligible for parole for 22 1/2 years, so he figures to be 70 or more when he gets out. If he ever gets out.
 
Last edited:

Garfinvold

New Member
Dec 8, 2022
20
Mel Hall was sort of like R Kelly. He had these rumors circulating about him for years. I think there was even a (Yankees?) yearbook photo with his 16 year old girlfriend at her prom one year....
 

CarolinaBeerGuy

Don't know him from Adam
SoSH Member
Mar 14, 2006
10,502
Kernersville, NC

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
31,462
https://x.com/Brewers/status/1792707006123651481

Would you consider this unusual? Stealing home on a throw back to the pitcher?
There were some "famous" catchers who had yips to the pitcher...Mackey Sasser, Mike Ivie and others.

From distant memory, I think I watched a game where that happened, and the announcer called it, somewhat officially-sounding a "lazy catcher's throw." He made it sound like "catcher's interference." Have never found such an official reference.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
21,531
Maine
Good thing the CF is a burner because that team looked hopelessly lost out there otherwise. Not a ton of baseball IQ to be had amongst them. Maybe I had overly thorough coaches growing up, but we often went over all kinds of defensive scenarios and the key thing for all of them was that all nine of us were supposed to be moving and had a job to do on every play. He definitely would have hated this play because practically everyone screwed up to varying degrees.

2B and SS went out after the pop-up, that's fine. First baseman should have been racing the batter/runner to second since it was uncovered but he's hopelessly trailing behind. The 3B should have stayed home but instead he appeared to be in no man's land before moving toward second way too late to be of any help. The left fielder is in the infield (good) but got caught watching the runner instead of seeing where he could be the most help (backing up or covering third). He's uselessly hovering when the runner comes through and he could easily have hustled over there with a bit of awareness. Same for the pitcher. He could have been covering 2B (he could have been the first one there), he could have been at 3B, he could have been at the plate. The catcher was hustling to cover 3B but he shouldn't have had to since there were up to three others that could have been there instead of him. When he left to cover 3B, he should have been yelling for someone (pitcher, 1B, hell even the RF) to cover the plate in his absence. Either he didn't or no one listened.
 

CSteinhardt

"Steiny"
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
3,207
Cambridge
Figured this might be a good place to ask a rules question (couldn't find another thread that looked better, but feel free to move if so) that came up in a league around here - I was helping as a volunteer umpire and hadn't seen the situation come up this way before, and would like to get it right going forward.

With a runner on first, a pitcher out of the stretch has a delivery in which they take the ball out of their glove, separating their hands fully and reaching back with their throwing arm, begin their motion towards the plate, and then as part of loading up to throw home put the ball back entirely into the glove (keeping it gripped in the throwing hand) before separating again mid-stride. Is this a legal delivery? I have seen MLB players in videos where they adjust the ball within their glove and do a tap in the delivery motion, but nothing where the hands are fully separated. The pitcher was doing this on some but not all pitches; for some others the ball stayed within the glove as he began his delivery and was only taken out a single time, as he prepared to throw. If it matters, this separation would be visible from the point of view of the runner on first base.

The relevant rule here is 8.05 (j):

8.05 If there is a runner, or runners, it is a balk when—
(j): The pitcher, after coming to a legal pitching position, removes one hand from the ball other than in an actual pitch, or in throwing to a base;

So If he does this and then comes set again or does this as the initial move in his delivery to the plate but then tries to throw to first instead, it's clearly a balk. But the question is whether he can remove one hand from the ball multiple times in course of the same delivery as long as that delivery ends in the ball being throw to home plate and there is otherwise no pause.
 

BroodsSexton

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 4, 2006
12,936
guam
Figured this might be a good place to ask a rules question (couldn't find another thread that looked better, but feel free to move if so) that came up in a league around here - I was helping as a volunteer umpire and hadn't seen the situation come up this way before, and would like to get it right going forward.

With a runner on first, a pitcher out of the stretch has a delivery in which they take the ball out of their glove, separating their hands fully and reaching back with their throwing arm, begin their motion towards the plate, and then as part of loading up to throw home put the ball back entirely into the glove (keeping it gripped in the throwing hand) before separating again mid-stride. Is this a legal delivery? I have seen MLB players in videos where they adjust the ball within their glove and do a tap in the delivery motion, but nothing where the hands are fully separated. The pitcher was doing this on some but not all pitches; for some others the ball stayed within the glove as he began his delivery and was only taken out a single time, as he prepared to throw. If it matters, this separation would be visible from the point of view of the runner on first base.

The relevant rule here is 8.05 (j):

8.05 If there is a runner, or runners, it is a balk when—
(j): The pitcher, after coming to a legal pitching position, removes one hand from the ball other than in an actual pitch, or in throwing to a base;

So If he does this and then comes set again or does this as the initial move in his delivery to the plate but then tries to throw to first instead, it's clearly a balk. But the question is whether he can remove one hand from the ball multiple times in course of the same delivery as long as that delivery ends in the ball being throw to home plate and there is otherwise no pause.
The rule says that it’s OK if he’s in the process of throwing a pitch or throwing to the base.
 

cromulence

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 25, 2009
7,138
Since you say that he's keeping it gripped in his throwing hand the entire time, I don't see how the rule would apply because he never removes his hand from the ball until he throws it. I feel like I've seen deliveries like this and it's never been an issue.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
8,209
Boston, MA
Didn't Paul Byrd have some deliveries like that? He'd tap the ball to the glove several times like a guy from the 1930s. I don't recall if he did it with runners on, through.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Yankees just hit into a double play. Bases loaded, Stanton hit a popup very near 2nd base. Runner on 2nd (Soto) didnt go right back to the bag and the SS bumped into him and missed the catch. Interference was the call. Boone got tossed, Yankee fans are livid. Calling for reinstatement of Angel Hernandez.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
72,638
Now Rizzo took a groundball off the leg as a baserunner to avoid a double play.
You can watch the replay on your phone but if he did this intentionally (brilliant if so, plus he got DJ an undeserved hit), he was incredibly smooth about it.
 

cromulence

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 25, 2009
7,138
Honestly, Sox fans - do you think that was a good call? What the hell is Soto supposed to do?
 

Heating up in the bullpen

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 24, 2007
1,182
Pittsboro NC
Honestly, Sox fans - do you think that was a good call? What the hell is Soto supposed to do?
Good call? It's the only call.
What could he do? Where to begin... He put himself in the position of having to lunge for the bag because he walked back to the base, only having any sense of urgency as the catch is about to be made. The play, including the shortstop getting in position to make the catch, is literally mere feet in front of him the whole time. There are any number of things he could have done to avoid colliding with the shortstop. Hustle back to the bag more quickly. Go around to the back side of the bag. Go to the ground with a hand tag and spin his body away from the shortstop.
But sure, once he walked back to the bag and was in danger of being doubled up because of his laziness, at that point his only option was to lay a hip check on the shortstop.
 

cromulence

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 25, 2009
7,138
Good call? It's the only call.
What could he do? Where to begin... He put himself in the position of having to lunge for the bag because he walked back to the base, only having any sense of urgency as the catch is about to be made. The play, including the shortstop getting in position to make the catch, is literally mere feet in front of him the whole time. There are any number of things he could have done to avoid colliding with the shortstop. Hustle back to the bag more quickly. Go around to the back side of the bag. Go to the ground with a hand tag and spin his body away from the shortstop.
But sure, once he walked back to the bag and was in danger of being doubled up because of his laziness, at that point his only option was to lay a hip check on the shortstop.
You're assigning all kinds of intent that is just not there. He's going back to the bag slowly because he has time, but also so that he has the ability to avoid the fielder. It's not his fault that the fielder misjudged the pop-up and at the absolute last moment lunges backwards to make the catch and slams into Soto. On top of that, Soto was on the base and the rule says that he has to intentionally make contact to be called out in that situation. He absolutely does not do that. It's a terrible rule and a terrible call.
 

Heating up in the bullpen

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 24, 2007
1,182
Pittsboro NC
You're assigning all kinds of intent that is just not there. He's going back to the bag slowly because he has time, but also so that he has the ability to avoid the fielder. It's not his fault that the fielder misjudged the pop-up and at the absolute last moment lunges backwards to make the catch and slams into Soto. On top of that, Soto was on the base and the rule says that he has to intentionally make contact to be called out in that situation. He absolutely does not do that. It's a terrible rule and a terrible call.
"If [a] runner has contact with a legally occupied base when he hinders [a fielder who is attempting to make a play on a batted ball], he shall not be called out unless, in the umpire’s judgment, such hindrance, whether it occurs on fair or foul territory, is intentional. If the umpire declares the hindrance intentional, the following penalty shall apply: With less than two out, the umpire shall declare both the runner and batter out. With two out, the umpire shall declare the batter out."
Ump judged the hindrance intentional. And F^ck Aaron Boone.
 

Over Guapo Grande

panty merchant
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2005
4,724
Worcester
Yah, based on this look, it is 100% correct. Soto was lunging for the bag when the contact occurred. He wasn't standing there and have the SS bump into him:

83360
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
72,638
Yah, based on this look, it is 100% correct. Soto was lunging for the bag when the contact occurred. He wasn't standing there and have the SS bump into him:

View attachment 83360
That's a bad angle, Soto had come to a stop on the base and the fielder flopped backwards over his leg. It was probably the right call by the book but MLB needs to tweak the rule to include common sense judgments by the ump.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
72,638
Also they called the infield fly rule on that ball, the ball should be dead as soon as the ump calls that. The infielder didn't need to catch the ball once that was ruled.

I'm not complaining to be clear, NY won the game (barely), I just dislike rules that don't make sense.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
47,025
That's a bad angle, Soto had come to a stop on the base and the fielder flopped backwards over his leg. It was probably the right call by the book but MLB needs to tweak the rule to include common sense judgments by the ump.
Imo. This is reminiscent of the early days of the rule change in which a runner could be off the bag for a half second and would be called out by the ump/replay.
Feels like players will learn to adjust
 

Over Guapo Grande

panty merchant
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2005
4,724
Worcester
That's a bad angle, Soto had come to a stop on the base and the fielder flopped backwards over his leg. It was probably the right call by the book but MLB needs to tweak the rule to include common sense judgments by the ump.
I have no dog in this pony show, so I won't drag it any further,,, but I feel you have a very...interesting take om what actually happened.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
72,638