Given their first 2 runners were via a gift from us and a gift from the umps, we were very fortunate just to give up 1 run.
First there was the Dude effect…
- Thread starter thekimmer
- Start date
I don’t understand why 3B was playing that far up the line with a runner on -2nd
Why did we have a Freshman hitting .154 up there with 2 outs?
Nobody better to pinch? Anyone else gets on base, and we had Faapito up
Nobody better to pinch? Anyone else gets on base, and we had Faapito up
Last edited:
Soooo stupid to go with that pitching change. But Cook's erratic play at 3rd beat us. We've got to upgrade our defense in a major way going forward.
I really hate to lose the game because the umpire decision. If they beat us they beat us. The umpire put two on base with no out which led to the run the tied the game. That's a ****** way to lose a ball game especially in the super regionals.
I still don't understand why it wasn't interference on the runner staying in the box and in the way of our girl trying to make a defensive play. I guess I just don't understand interference anymore.
I still don't understand why it wasn't interference on the runner staying in the box and in the way of our girl trying to make a defensive play. I guess I just don't understand interference anymore.
I'm not into blaming shite on umps, but I watched the last 3 innings and everything close went Arizona's way.
An obvious strike that would have ended up sitting the ultimate tying run down before she ever got on base (he called at least 3 pitches off the plate strikes after that).
And then a BS interference call putting a stumbling runner who has 0 chance of being safe on 1st with no outs.
Sorry, but it needs to be said. Stop blaming our 3rd baseman and pitchers.
That said, we had way to many hits and walks to be sitting at 2 runs in the 8th.
An obvious strike that would have ended up sitting the ultimate tying run down before she ever got on base (he called at least 3 pitches off the plate strikes after that).
And then a BS interference call putting a stumbling runner who has 0 chance of being safe on 1st with no outs.
Sorry, but it needs to be said. Stop blaming our 3rd baseman and pitchers.
That said, we had way to many hits and walks to be sitting at 2 runs in the 8th.
It was just super awkward bad luck.
A bunt that went nowhere plus an off-balance batter that took a minute to start running. No way it was intentional, but it was incredibly fortunate for AZ.
A bunt that went nowhere plus an off-balance batter that took a minute to start running. No way it was intentional, but it was incredibly fortunate for AZ.
The call was correct and the error was an easy play. Pitcher has given up bombs and runs all year minus one game. I still like our chances tomorrow, but we've got to hit better.
The "error" was a obviously ruled a hit, because we had no errors, so apparently you have a disagreement with the game officials there.
Is the one game you refer to, the 7 inning shutout last weekend of the #2 team in the country? She has a sub 3 ERA. Can she really be as awful as you want us to believe?
And the interference call was ********. Opinions will vary.
I agree that it was not intentional I was just saying you could've called it the other way if you were looking at the play from that perspective. It should've just been no call except out at first base like she was before the umpire decided he needed to review the play.
Not to mention the catcher was behind the runner not in front.
I believe this is the rule. It would have to of been an obvious attempt by the runner to block our catcher for them to have called it the other way. Just my opinion - since there's not anything that requires the batter to move after hitting the ball, being slow out of the box can't be considered a penalty. Technically she could stand there and be tagged out, as long as she wasn't moving to block the catcher.
(c) Catcher Interference
The batter becomes a runner and is entitled to first base without liability to be put out (provided he advances to and touches first base) when the catcher or any fielder interferes with him. If a play follows the interference, the manager of the offense may advise the plate umpire that he elects to decline the interference penalty and accept the play. Such election shall be made immediately at the end of the play. However, if the batter reaches first base on a hit, an error, a base on balls, a hit batsman, or otherwise, and all other runners advance at least one base, the play proceeds without reference to the interference.
(c) Catcher Interference
The batter becomes a runner and is entitled to first base without liability to be put out (provided he advances to and touches first base) when the catcher or any fielder interferes with him. If a play follows the interference, the manager of the offense may advise the plate umpire that he elects to decline the interference penalty and accept the play. Such election shall be made immediately at the end of the play. However, if the batter reaches first base on a hit, an error, a base on balls, a hit batsman, or otherwise, and all other runners advance at least one base, the play proceeds without reference to the interference.
Worst part was the contact had NO impact on the play. The batter was out by a mile and would have been out by a mile regardless. Just a shame that a call on mild contact that was of no effect likely decided the game.
If a fielder is making a play on a batted ball, doesn’t he/she have the right to the base path? I thought it should’ve been runner interference if anything, so batter/runner is out and other runner back to first.
eta: if the rule is as they called it today, then every time i bunt with a righty, I’m telling them to walk slowly in front of the plate to make sure the catcher can’t get to the ball and make a play.
eta: if the rule is as they called it today, then every time i bunt with a righty, I’m telling them to walk slowly in front of the plate to make sure the catcher can’t get to the ball and make a play.
Perfectly argued. The original no call was the right call. Umps use judgement all game long. The judgement there should be the players collided a bit, but the play progressed as it should have. She was going to be out by a mile with a good throw (which happened). No advantage was gained from the minor collision.
Reversing that call changed the game.
But it's not a judgement call. It's the rule. Its a bad rule that needs to be adjusted. But it's the rule. Don't walk the leadoff and/or make an error at 3rd and we still win.
Latest posts
-
-
Sounds like little Lane got in trouble- Latest: YesIAmAPirate
-
Are we back to the early 2000s?
- Latest: greenbean.sixpack
Get unlimited access today.