WCWS so far

[SoCalASABlue]

At least crack the damn spine on the rule book and pretend to read the definition of the strike zone before you go behind the plate. When did a pitch on the corner at the belt become a ball?

These pitchers have spent thousands of hours (and a lot of their parents' money) to learn how NOT to throw the ball down the middle of the plate.

You want to call a baseball strike zone? Stay in little league.

I feel like I'm watching the SoCal CIF playoffs.

[Trophy Hunter]

In many cases you are watching the CIF playoffs, only difference now is the players are a little older and shuffled around onto new teams.

[Kerplunk!]

Texas vs Oregon 5/26/12, strike zone appeared to be belly button high and 1/2 ball over the plate - Amazing, many batters still did not swing!

I am confused about the results of an interference call made during T vs O, 5/26/12, 3rd game I think? Set up: Less than 2 outs, Oregon at bat, R1@3B, R2@2B, BR hits a routine fly ball to SS. R2 interferes with SS catching the ball when returning to 2B from her lead off, No malicious attempt to prevent a double play just trying to get back to the bag. SS appears to have made the catch anyway. 2011 ASA Umpires Manual (All I got) Rule 8, Section 7J1 "Runner is out when a runner interferes with a fielder attempting to field a batted fair ball..." OK all agree here - Dead ball R2 out, all base runners return to where they came from. Why does the BR get AWARDED 1B? Where is the logic in awarding a base to the team that caused the interference? The effect of the ruling is that this is just a simple fielder’s choice! Hardly a penalty - the out would have been registered against the BR anyway had the ball not been declared dead. Just looking for logic and reason here?

I think Batter should go back in the box and resume her count, just like all the base runners had to return to their original spots. Maybe treat it like a foul ball against the batter?

[MTR]

I am confused about the results of an interference call made during T vs O, 5/26/12, 3rd game I think? Set up: Less than 2 outs, Oregon at bat, R1@3B, R2@2B, BR hits a routine fly ball to SS. R2 interferes with SS catching the ball when returning to 2B from her lead off, No malicious attempt to prevent a double play just trying to get back to the bag. SS appears to have made the catch anyway. 2011 ASA Umpires Manual (All I got) Rule 8, Section 7J1 "Runner is out when a runner interferes with a fielder attempting to field a batted fair ball..." OK all agree here - Dead ball R2 out, all base runners return to where they came from. Why does the BR get AWARDED 1B? Where is the logic in awarding a base to the team that caused the interference? The effect of the ruling is that this is just a simple fielder’s choice! Hardly a penalty - the out would have been registered against the BR anyway had the ball not been declared dead. Just looking for logic and reason here?

I think Batter should go back in the box and resume her count, just like all the base runners had to return to their original spots. Maybe treat it like a foul ball against the batter?

You have to do something with the BR. There is no "do over". Nothing new here, it is what it is and has been in NCAA, ASA, NFHS & ISF. The ONLY way the call could have been made that was different is if the umpire judged that the INT was committed with the intent of breaking up a double play and, obviously, that is not the case here.

[Kerplunk!]

Got it, we can't return the Batter Runner (BR) like we can the Runners (R). My trusty rule book states "NOTE-Section 7J-L: When runners are called out for interference, the batter-runner is awarded first base. EXCEPTION: If the interference prevents the fielder from catching a routine fly ball, fair or foul, with ordinary effort the batter is also out." Ref: (2011 ASA Umpires Manual p93 Rule 8, Section 7L)

By ASA rule Texas F6 should have purposely dropped the routine fly ball to have the (BR) called out also. Instead F6 caught the ball and the BR gets awarded 1st base?

HHHMMMmmmmmmm I are confuzed again. Any thoughts to help me understand this quirk in the ASA rules would be appreciated. I asume the NCAA rules don't have this note?

[BearsDad]

and to suspend cuicco for sliding into home? I watched it several times. it didn't look that bad to me.

[MTR]

Got it, we can't return the Batter Runner (BR) like we can the Runners (R). My trusty rule book states "NOTE-Section 7J-L: When runners are called out for interference, the batter-runner is awarded first base. EXCEPTION: If the interference prevents the fielder from catching a routine fly ball, fair or foul, with ordinary effort the batter is also out." Ref: (2011 ASA Umpires Manual p93 Rule 8, Section 7L)

By ASA rule Texas F6 should have purposely dropped the routine fly ball to have the (BR) called out also. Instead F6 caught the ball and the BR gets awarded 1st base?

HHHMMMmmmmmmm I are confuzed again. Any thoughts to help me understand this quirk in the ASA rules would be appreciated. I asume the NCAA rules don't have this note?

ASA & NCAA are not the same.

[MTR]

and to suspend cuicco for sliding into home? I watched it several times. it didn't look that bad to me.

She was ejected for throwing an elbow at the catcher's head. Didn't seem effective, but she did it. If you watch the replay, her reaction seems to be that of a realization that she screwed up before the umpire ejected her.

The suspension was for a malicious contact report filed for the ejection.

[Kerplunk!]

and to suspend cuicco for sliding into home? I watched it several times. it didn't look that bad to me.

She was ejected for throwing an elbow at the catcher's head. Didn't seem effective, but she did it. If you watch the replay, her reaction seems to be that of a realization that she screwed up before the umpire ejected her.

The suspension was for a malicious contact report filed for the ejection.

In Soccer/Basketball they teach the referees to adjust enforcement of the rules to control the game. Let them play is a term often used. Once the players start cheap shotting each other then enforce the rules more strictly to prevent retaliatory contact. Do this in BB or SB as an umpire and you will get hung! - This is why these umpires are under fire. PU should have nailed Cuicco the first time she lowered her shoulder to body slam the Tx Catcher who was obstructing (unintentionally). This would have prevented the subsequent Texas smack down of the Oregon catcher and all of the attempted spiking of Tx players by O while sliding into bases and ultimately the 2nd Cuicco elbow incident - which seemed relatively minor considering all the other stuff the PU let go. Bottom line Referees can screw around, Umpires can't.

[umplarry]

Texas vs Oregon 5/26/12, strike zone appeared to be belly button high and 1/2 ball over the plate - Amazing, many batters still did not swing!

How could you tell where the corners were, the camera shot was coming from left center field, not straight away?