Runner at 3rd

[prodigy]

SITUATION.... With a runner at third.... ball four was called on the batter. To prevent the batter/runner from running continuously to 2nd we had our catcher throw the ball to first.. The opposing coach called time and spoke to the ump in which case the blue awarded the girl at first to second and the girl at third was awarded home.. When i spoke to the blue all he could tell me was that it was illeagle for my catcher to throw to first to prevent the runner from advancing and that the ball had to be thrown to my pitcher prior to throwing to first.. i have checked the rules and i have found nothing!!!! We eneded up wining but for future i want to know thw correct ruling on such a play! i truelly feel the blue was very intimidated by the opposing coach...

[tcannizzo]

What rules set was this? Actually it doesn't matter, just curious.
The only time there is a penalty for F2 not throwing directly back to F1 is while there are no runners on base and the batter is still "up at bat"; i.e. 1-1 count and F2 throws to F5. In ASA, a ball would be issued to the batter.

So, I cannot support the call made here.

Further, in NHFS, there is a Point of Emphasis and Case Play that covers this kind of play when the BR has the potential to be guilty of INT vis-a-vis a Running Lane violation, but that has no real bearing on this except that it confirms that an F2-F3 throw-down is a permissible "play".

[Comp]

Never ceases to amaze me some of the rulings umpires manage to come up with. As has already been stated the play you have described is completely legal.

What age group are you dealing with? Throwing to 1st does not turn on the look back rule and the runner at 3rd is free to do as they please.

[prodigy]

thank you so much for reponding. we were playing 12u when this happened and as you have confirmed there was no wrong doing. thank you for your time in responding.

[AlwaysImprove]

I have seen this exact scenario called in the past. It was in rec league. In actually talked to the Umpire trainer about it. His explanation was that umpire 'could' be determining that this was a delay of game tactic, and could have been ruling under a broad unsportsman like delay of game. It was all very wishy washy. It was actually being called on the other team, so I did not care too much, just wanted to try and learn.

I also this saw same justification in from some homers umpiring a game in a small town tournament. This time we were playing a team with a legitimately speedy runner that was stealing on everyone. My catcher was awesome, so she would sneak a throw down to first, and keep her honest. We were almost getting her every throw. Umpires ruled we were doing that to delay the game and gave her second. Later we threw her out at second.

I also saw this called on a team I was watching once. This may have been legitimate use, if there is such a rule. This team like to throw to first, have the first baseman intentionally miss the ball. At 12U, most girls are taught to take off for second when this happens. This team had practiced this play a lot and had their right fielder pick the ball and throw the girl out at second. Long after the runners stopped running they kept running this play, like 5 times an inning. Either the coaches legitimately thought they were working on something, or they were just dbags. It was making the game take for ever. Umpires rung them up for delay of game.

I cannot site the rules these were being called under. Most of them seemed like BS the umps were making up to serve some agenda. Legit or not, I was happy to see it called on that third scenario.

[tcannizzo]

I also saw this called on a team I was watching once. This may have been legitimate use, if there is such a rule. This team like to throw to first, have the first baseman intentionally miss the ball. At 12U, most girls are taught to take off for second when this happens. This team had practiced this play a lot and had their right fielder pick the ball and throw the girl out at second. Long after the runners stopped running they kept running this play, like 5 times an inning. Either the coaches legitimately thought they were working on something, or they were just dbags. It was making the game take for ever. Umpires rung them up for delay of game.

I cannot site the rules these were being called under. Most of them seemed like BS the umps were making up to serve some agenda. Legit or not, I was happy to see it called on that third scenario.

What penalty was applied?

[AlwaysImprove]

I also saw this called on a team I was watching once. This may have been legitimate use, if there is such a rule. This team like to throw to first, have the first baseman intentionally miss the ball. At 12U, most girls are taught to take off for second when this happens. This team had practiced this play a lot and had their right fielder pick the ball and throw the girl out at second. Long after the runners stopped running they kept running this play, like 5 times an inning. Either the coaches legitimately thought they were working on something, or they were just dbags. It was making the game take for ever. Umpires rung them up for delay of game.

I cannot site the rules these were being called under. Most of them seemed like BS the umps were making up to serve some agenda. Legit or not, I was happy to see it called on that third scenario.

What penalty was applied?

They gave the girl second base. I know, the called seemed random to me. I asked a few of the umpires hanging around, including UIC. They hemmed and hawed, but eventually the group settled in unsportsmanlike delay of game. UIC was always directly ready to quote chapter and verse. On this one he said he "would have to see the play".

I did not know either team in the game. The girls were next age level up from our team. Someone told me to go watch the coaches cause they were completely over the top and goofballs. That seemed like most of the coaches around, so I wanted to see how they were topping the regularly crazy. They definitely were a notch above.

[MTR]

I have seen this exact scenario called in the past. It was in rec league. In actually talked to the Umpire trainer about it. His explanation was that umpire 'could' be determining that this was a delay of game tactic, and could have been ruling under a broad unsportsman like delay of game. It was all very wishy washy. It was actually being called on the other team, so I did not care too much, just wanted to try and learn.

I also this saw same justification in from some homers umpiring a game in a small town tournament. This time we were playing a team with a legitimately speedy runner that was stealing on everyone. My catcher was awesome, so she would sneak a throw down to first, and keep her honest. We were almost getting her every throw. Umpires ruled we were doing that to delay the game and gave her second. Later we threw her out at second.

I also saw this called on a team I was watching once. This may have been legitimate use, if there is such a rule. This team like to throw to first, have the first baseman intentionally miss the ball. At 12U, most girls are taught to take off for second when this happens. This team had practiced this play a lot and had their right fielder pick the ball and throw the girl out at second. Long after the runners stopped running they kept running this play, like 5 times an inning. Either the coaches legitimately thought they were working on something, or they were just dbags. It was making the game take for ever. Umpires rung them up for delay of game.

I cannot site the rules these were being called under. Most of them seemed like BS the umps were making up to serve some agenda. Legit or not, I was happy to see it called on that third scenario.

Speaking ASA, NFHS, ISF, etc. this is a weak, BS call. There is no justification for it, under any rule, broad or not. Not much confidence in your umpire trainer, either.

[tcannizzo]

I did not know either team in the game. The girls were next age level up from our team. Someone told me to go watch the coaches cause they were completely over the top and goofballs. That seemed like most of the coaches around, so I wanted to see how they were topping the regularly crazy. They definitely were a notch above.

Sounds like you got your money's worth.

[AlwaysImprove]

I have seen this exact scenario called in the past. It was in rec league. In actually talked to the Umpire trainer about it. His explanation was that umpire 'could' be determining that this was a delay of game tactic, and could have been ruling under a broad unsportsman like delay of game. It was all very wishy washy. It was actually being called on the other team, so I did not care too much, just wanted to try and learn.

I also this saw same justification in from some homers umpiring a game in a small town tournament. This time we were playing a team with a legitimately speedy runner that was stealing on everyone. My catcher was awesome, so she would sneak a throw down to first, and keep her honest. We were almost getting her every throw. Umpires ruled we were doing that to delay the game and gave her second. Later we threw her out at second.

I also saw this called on a team I was watching once. This may have been legitimate use, if there is such a rule. This team like to throw to first, have the first baseman intentionally miss the ball. At 12U, most girls are taught to take off for second when this happens. This team had practiced this play a lot and had their right fielder pick the ball and throw the girl out at second. Long after the runners stopped running they kept running this play, like 5 times an inning. Either the coaches legitimately thought they were working on something, or they were just dbags. It was making the game take for ever. Umpires rung them up for delay of game.

I cannot site the rules these were being called under. Most of them seemed like BS the umps were making up to serve some agenda. Legit or not, I was happy to see it called on that third scenario.

Speaking ASA, NFHS, ISF, etc. this is a weak, BS call. There is no justification for it, under any rule, broad or not. Not much confidence in your umpire trainer, either.

He was an extremely knowledgeable. I would put him only slightly behind you, bretman, and a couple of others here.

Maybe it was just a matter of practicality on his part. Couple of goofball coaches run into a goofball ump. Staying free of that may have been the smart play. A sanity retaining slight detour from hard butted rule application. 99 out of 100 times he was spot on.