G3: UTA at Louisiana

[cajundiehard]

Throw to third to get the force out ump said Kennon foot was off bag I’m watching game and the replay clearly showed his foot was still on bag

Agreed. Bad call by ump.

Made a big difference in out bottom of the inning. We got lead off man on and would have sac'ed him over. Couldn't do that down by two.

BIG yuge BAD call. Why are we getting burned by so many bad calls this year?

[CajunVic]

Curious... How does this work if... say they had gotten Montgomery out on a K instead of walking him. Do they let it go at that point? And protest whenever the next guy reaches base? Or is it over and done once you get the improper batter out?

If I recall a similar situation happened last night and it looked like a different result was called. Batter got called for catcher interference on a throw down. Runner stealing was called out. Batter was going back to dugout because he thought he was called out and was made to return to plate to complete his at bat. It appeared that the only difference between today's play and yesterday's was that today the stealing runner was the third out and yesterday it was the second so you went back in the field before the circumstance would present itself today. Anyone have any further clarification on the difference between these two?

[cajundiehard]

If I recall a similar situation happened last night and it looked like a different result was called. Batter got called for catcher interference on a throw down. Runner stealing was called out. Batter was going back to dugout because he thought he was called out and was made to return to plate to complete his at bat. It appeared that the only difference between today's play and yesterday's was that today the stealing runner was the third out and yesterday it was the second so you went back in the field before the circumstance would present itself today. Anyone have any further clarification on the difference between these two?

I think yesterday it was the 2nd and 3rd out... so no questions... double play... Next batter in the line-up bats...

Today - it was just one out (the batter called for interference)... so should have been next man up next inning... but he came out again.

[CajunVic]

Yesterday the stealing runner called out for interference was the second out and after that play, the interfering batter was brought back to the box to complete his bat.

[cajundiehard]

Yesterday the stealing runner called out for interference was the second out and after that play, the interfering batter was brought back to the box to complete his bat.

See - there is the confusion.

Today the batter was out for interference.

You are saying the "stealing runner called out for interference" yesterday. hmmm something ain't right. ;-)

I thought that yesterday the batter was called out for interference and the runner was out by virtue of actually tagging him out - hence, double play. I'm guessing if the stealing runner would have been safe on the throw, then he simply would have been sent back to first and the batter out for interference... Yes?

[CajunVic]

See - there is the confusion.

Today the batter was out for interference.

You are saying the "stealing runner called out for interference" yesterday. hmmm something ain't right. ;-)

I thought that yesterday the batter was called out for interference and the runner was out by virtue of actually tagging him out - hence, double play. I'm guessing if the stealing runner would have been safe on the throw, then he simply would have been sent back to first and the batter out for interference... Yes?

I no longer have a clue, all I know is yesterday, the running base stealer was an out, the batter was going to the dugout like he thought he was called out and was made to come back to complete his bat. That was why I was confused further about what transpired today.

[CajunAmos]

If I recall a similar situation happened last night and it looked like a different result was called. Batter got called for catcher interference on a throw down. Runner stealing was called out. Batter was going back to dugout because he thought he was called out and was made to return to plate to complete his at bat. It appeared that the only difference between today's play and yesterday's was that today the stealing runner was the third out and yesterday it was the second so you went back in the field before the circumstance would present itself today. Anyone have any further clarification on the difference between these two?

I think it goes like this. If the runner had been called out, the hitter would have started the next inning batting. Since the runner was called safe, the batter was called out which made him an illegal hitter starting off the next inning.

[CajunVic]

I think it goes like this. If the runner had been called out, the hitter would have started the next inning batting. Since the runner was called safe, the batter was called out which made him an illegal hitter starting off the next inning.

So you saying only one out. If the catcher still makes the out on the runner regardless of the interference, no penalty to the batter and he retains his bat. If the catcher does not make the out, batter is out?

Question: on the second scenario, should not the runner be made to go back to first? Why should there be any benefit from the interference? If that is the case, couldn't the batter just tackle the catcher to advance a runner rather than depend on the sac bunt?

Edit: never mind, second instance the batter out was third out so no need to address runner. If that would have been an earlier out, I presume runner would have been moved back to first.

[GeauxLouisiana]

So you saying only one out. If the catcher still makes the out on the runner regardless of the interference, no penalty to the batter and he retains his bat. If the catcher does not make the out, batter is out?

Question: on the second scenario, should not the runner be made to go back to first? Why should there be any benefit from the interference? If that is the case, couldn't the batter just tackle the catcher to advance a runner rather than depend on the sac bunt?

Edit: never mind, second instance the batter out was third out so no need to address runner. If that would have been an earlier out, I presume runner would have been moved back to first.

Can’t double dip. If less than 2 outs, batter is out and runner goes back to his original base.

[CajunRage]

Can’t double dip. If less than 2 outs, batter is out and runner goes back to his original base.

I believe it’s like a free play in football. Play it out and you can take the interference or not. If you take interference runner goes back like the play didn’t happen.