Official Ruling on the Lady Vols vs UCLA Controversy

[EZE]

Better that the game was decided by actual play on the field rather than such a stupid rule anyway.

Call may have been wrong by rule book definition, but the right call was made for the spirit of the game.

It was a home run, who cares how/when/etc the base is touched.

I couldn’t disagree more. If you are going to have rules, they need to apply equally in the 1st and 7th innings. And you cant selectively apply them only when it is comfortable.

Yes, it woulda been a crappy way to end the game. But that is what shoulda happened.

NCAA failed miserably IMO.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

I couldn’t disagree more. If you are going to have rules, they need to apply equally in the 1st and 7th innings. And you cant selectively apply them only when it is comfortable.

Yes, it woulda been a crappy way to end the game. But that is what shoulda happened.

NCAA failed miserably IMO.

Yep! Who should care if you step out of the box? Who should care if you leave early, who should care if you run out of the lane? Is proximity to the bag enough on force outs?

If it is a rule and can absolutely be reviewed, it should be.

That Appendix G farce is sickening. Did someone legally score or not has to be in play.

Did we get an apology from the NCAA for missing the call their announcement acknowledged?

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

Last I put in this issue (maybe)….

Do not have access to replay, so can anyone tell me if the batter ever passed the runner after initially missing the plate and before she was assisted back. If she did she was out by rule 12.4.3 I think it was. No word mincing there.

Where is the only be a warning language coming from on the assistance? 12.4.4 clearly defines the issue EXCEPT it references a live ball.

 

[tnburban]

NCAA softball has a serious common sense rules issue.

The obstruction call tonight in TX/TTU is an absolute joke. They have to fix this clown show of review/officiating decisions. This is the 4th major WTF call after review in the world series this year, all of which have had significant impact at the time. And yes, I am calling the runner interference call that went in TN's favor as one of those WTF reviews.

 

[IBlvNTmWrk]

Last I put in this issue (maybe)….

Do not have access to replay, so can anyone tell me if the batter ever passed the runner after initially missing the plate and before she was assisted back. If she did she was out by rule 12.4.3 I think it was. No word mincing there.

Where is the only be a warning language coming from on the assistance? 12.4.4 clearly defines the issue EXCEPT it references a live ball.

I may not fully understand your question. If you're talking about the "batter" (as the player that hit the HR) and the "runner" (as the player that was on the base), then I don't think that rule would apply. Once the "runner" crossed home plate (and tagged home plate) I don't think she would be considered a runner at that point, and would be no different than any of the other players. I think the rule you're referring to involves "active" runners (i.e. players that can be tagged out) and that's not the case once you tag home plate.

Just my thoughts.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

I may not fully understand your question. If you're talking about the "batter" (as the player that hit the HR) and the "runner" (as the player that was on the base), then I don't think that rule would apply. Once the "runner" crossed home plate (and tagged home plate) I don't think she would be considered a runner at that point, and would be no different than any of the other players. I think the rule you're referring to involves "active" runners (i.e. players that can be tagged out) and that's not the case once you tag home plate.

Just my thoughts.

Why if she passed the other runner before touching the plate would the rule not apply? Language is not vague. Can’t get it to cut and paste from online rule book.

 

[glv98]

Where is the only be a warning language coming from on the assistance? 12.4.4 clearly defines the issue EXCEPT it references a live ball.

Announcers said it during the review and umps and ncaa said it after the game. Penalty first time is a warning.

 

[volfan102455]

Announcers said it during the review and umps and ncaa said it after the game. Penalty first time is a warning.

That was their cover up opt out since they knew they got it wrong.

 

[volfan102455]

Not touching home is the same as when football players drop the ball before the goal line (because they think it makes them look cool). You still have a requirement to finish the play per the rules. Umps were just too weak to make the right call, which should have been made live.

Or you lose the ball right before and it goes through the end zone and awarded to the other team as a touch back.

Should have been a TD but the player didn't finish even though they were wide open with no one even close to tackle them.

 

[volfan102455]

For those of you saying - it is a HR should have counted regardless, my understanding is there was a situation in a game several years ago where something similar happened - however the runner proceeded towards the dugout - no assist at all. The ref to start the next play handed a new ball to the catcher. The catcher tagged the plate and then tagged the runner when the runner came back to touch the plate. The runner was ruled out.

I totally get that the outrage of taking a HR away - but in reality, the current play is still "in play" until the batter has circled and touched all the bases or exits the field of play.

Even in a walk off HR, the game does not end or the run count until the batter touches home plate.

 

[EZE]

NCAA softball has a serious common sense rules issue.

The obstruction call tonight in TX/TTU is an absolute joke. They have to fix this clown show of review/officiating decisions. This is the 4th major WTF call after review in the world series this year, all of which have had significant impact at the time. And yes, I am calling the runner interference call that went in TN's favor as one of those WTF reviews.

I didn’t like that call either, and I have family ties to Tech.

What initially was a great rule against physically blocking bases and the resulting collisions….

Has been bastardized to the point that it is obstruction for a fielder to merely apply a tag.

 

[GameTime]

Here is an example of having to touch all the bases after a home run....Even though the player is severely injured (torn ligament) she has to touch all bases...She is carried by the other team so she can't be called out because her teammates helped her touch all the bases...

 

[EZE]

Announcers said it during the review and umps and ncaa said it after the game. Penalty first time is a warning.

If that really is the rule then it is a really dumb rule.

 

[Rickster]

Just another NCAA coverup for the ump that didn't do his job. Call it assisted, unassisted, missed, touched.....in the end, it is the UMP that had the epic failure. Glad we won. I could see the NCAA caving for the traditional power house. That's par for them.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

Announcers said it during the review and umps and ncaa said it after the game. Penalty first time is a warning.

Once again, where is that documented. Gotta be in an associated document somewhere if it is real.

 

[glv98]

My God those tin foil hats are too tight. So they whipped up an easily proved wrong conspiracy on the spot including several dozen people willing to risk their careers in public. You guys, my God touch some grass. The whole universe is not a plot against UT.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

https://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/SR24.pdf

One last Appendix G statement they did not share with the viewing public.

Go to the next to last statement #9 in the Crireria portion and see if the latitude to make the right call was not available to them once they were reviewing the miss at the plate.

Tried to paste just the statement but can’t pull it off, tags the whole book. Hint, WAAAAAY at the bottom.

 

[Majors]

My God those tin foil hats are too tight. So they whipped up an easily proved wrong conspiracy on the spot including several dozen people willing to risk their careers in public. You guys, my God touch some grass. The whole universe is not a plot against UT.

We are not victims.

 

[glv98]

We are not victims.

Conspiracy buffs just don’t seem to ever factor in logic or common sense. So five minutes after the totally random play occurred, the announcers during the review were already passing on the coverup line about the penalty being a warning. A conspiracy which had been hatched and approved by the umps, the NCAA and every official of the WCWS. In five minutes. And of those several dozen people, not a single one refused to go along and still not one has spoken up since to bust the conspiracy.

Do people really, deep down believe this comic crap?

 

[knoxvol52]

Conspiracy buffs just don’t seem to ever factor in logic or common sense. So five minutes after the totally random play occurred, the announcers during the review were already passing on the coverup line about the penalty being a warning. A conspiracy which had been hatched and approved by the umps, the NCAA and every official of the WCWS. In five minutes. And of those several dozen people, not a single one refused to go along and still not one has spoken up since to bust the conspiracy.

Do people really, deep down believe this comic crap?

Nothing like a good conspiracy theory.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

Conspiracy buffs just don’t seem to ever factor in logic or common sense. So five minutes after the totally random play occurred, the announcers during the review were already passing on the coverup line about the penalty being a warning. A conspiracy which had been hatched and approved by the umps, the NCAA and every official of the WCWS. In five minutes. And of those several dozen people, not a single one refused to go along and still not one has spoken up since to bust the conspiracy.

Do people really, deep down believe this comic crap?

They never took the responsibility for the Mount Cody call either. There was zero option to NOT THROW THE FLAG, whether it was enforceable or not. It was NEVER established that the ball went beyond the LOS before recovery, that might make that true.

They changed 3-4 rules the next book to cover their miss.

 

[glv98]

They never took the responsibility for the Mount Cody call either. There was zero option to NOT THROW THE FLAG, whether it was enforceable or not. It was NEVER established that the ball went beyond the LOS before recovery, that might make that true.

They changed 3-4 rules the next book to cover their miss.

Like I said. . .

 

[volfan102455]

My God those tin foil hats are too tight. So they whipped up an easily proved wrong conspiracy on the spot including several dozen people willing to risk their careers in public. You guys, my God touch some grass. The whole universe is not a plot against UT.

Back to the call in the UCLA game - I think they were truly trying to figure out something that would allow the runs to stand that they thought would make sense and was somewhat defendable with any rule they could find. There were at least two prior instances that were similar in the history of the sport - both were ruled outs, and the run did not count. Neither were warnings. The announcers were clear that this same situation caused the US the Gold Medal. Early on in the review it was clear by their words and the UCLA's coaches face that all thought the end result would be an out with game over.

But I truly believe the UMPS and the announcers did not want the game to end like that - on an error by the player - when it should have.

I also believe the umps were probably very relieved when Tennessee won the game, though it took two extra innings for that to happen.

Conspiracy against Tennessee - not really - more of the idea of not ending a game on a unique call of out by a ref where a couple of players make mistakes. If this had happened early in the game - call may have been different because the team that takes the hit has time to recover from a player mistake.

 

[glv98]

Back to the call in the UCLA game - I think they were truly trying to figure out something that would allow the runs to stand that they thought would make sense and was somewhat defendable with any rule they could find. There were at least two prior instances that were similar in the history of the sport - both were ruled outs, and the run did not count. Neither were warnings. The announcers were clear that this same situation caused the US the Gold Medal. Early on in the review it was clear by their words and the UCLA's coaches face that all thought the end result would be an out with game over.

But I truly believe the UMPS and the announcers did not want the game to end like that - on an error by the player - when it should have.

I also believe the umps were probably very relieved when Tennessee won the game, though it took two extra innings for that to happen.

Conspiracy against Tennessee - not really - more of the idea of not ending a game on a unique call of out by a ref where a couple of players make mistakes. If this had happened early in the game - call may have been different because the team that takes the hit has time to recover from a player mistake.

I still don’t believe the announcers made that up on the spot on the air. I believe a warning is and was the rule. Was everyone relieved it didn’t end on that incident? Of course. Was a make good created on the spot and agreed to by all? Of course not.

It’s far too easy to disprove if it wasn’t the rule. Both dugouts literally had rule books out pouring over. If any rule was misrepresented we would know.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

I still don’t believe the announcers made that up on the spot on the air. I believe a warning is and was the rule. Was everyone relieved it didn’t end on that incident? Of course. Was a make good created on the spot and agreed to by all? Of course not.

It’s far too easy to disprove if it wasn’t the rule. Both dugouts literally had rule books out pouring over. If any rule was misrepresented we would know.

Provide the document and the whole world can agree if that is what is written down, till then it is hearsay.