Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Showing posts with labelShane Livensparger.Show all posts
Showing posts with labelShane Livensparger.Show all posts

Saturday, September 20, 2025

MLB Ejections 163-4 - Shane Livensparger (1-2; HOU x2)

HP Umpire Shane Livensparger ejected Astros hitting coach Troy Snitker and manager Joe Espada (strike three call to Jesús Sánchez; QOCY) in the bottom of the 5th inning of the #Mariners-#Astros game. With out and one and none on, Astros batter Sánchez took a 1-2 sinker from Mariners pitcher George Kirby for a called third strike. Replays indicate the pitch was located over the inner half of home plate and below the midpoint (px 0.60, pz 3.56 [sz_top 3.56 / RAD 3.68]), the call was correct.* At the time of the ejection, the Mariners were leading, 5-0. The Mariners ultimately won the contest, 6-4.

These are Shane Livensparger (43)'s 1st and 2nd ejections of 2025.
*This pitch was located 2.40 vertical inches from being deemed incorrect.

These are the 163rd and 164th ejection reports of the 2025 MLB regular season.
This is the 27th coach ejection of 2025.
This is the 85th manager ejection of 2025. Ejection Tally: 85 Managers, 27 Coaches, 52 Players.
This is Houston's 4/5th ejection of 2025, 2nd in the AL West (LAA 8;HOU 5; OAK, SEA 4; TEX 3).
This is Troy Snitker's 2nd ejection of 2025, 1st sinceAugust 15 (Chad Fairchild; QOC = Y [Balls/Strikes]).
This is Joe Espada's 2nd ejection of 2025, 1st sinceMay 18 (Nick Mahrley; QOC = N [Balls/Strikes]).
This is Shane Livensparger's 1st ejection sinceOctober 1, 2023 (Joey Votto; QOC = N [Balls/Strikes]).

Wrap: Seattle Mariners vs Houston Astros, 9/20/25 | Video as follows:

Sunday, October 1, 2023

MLB Ejection 239 - Shane Livensparger (2; Joey Votto)

HP Umpire Shane Livensparger ejected Reds 1B Joey Votto (strike two call; QOCN) at the end of the 1st inning of the #Reds-#Cardinals game. With one out and none on in the top of the 1st, Votto took a 1-1 sinker from Reds pitcher Miles Mikolas for a called second strike before striking out on a foul tip. Replays indicate the 1-1 pitch was located off the inner edge of home plate and thigh-high (px 0.99, pz 2.66), the call was incorrect.* At the time of the ejection, the Reds were leading, 1-0. The Cardinals ultimately won the contest, 4-3.

This is Shane Livensparger (43)'s 2nd ejection of 2023.
*UEFL Rule 6-2-b-1 (Kulpa Rule): |0| ≤ STRIKE < |.748| ≤ BORDERLINE ≤ |.914| < BALL.
This pitch was located 0.91 horizontal inches from being deemed correct.

This is the 239th ejection report of the 2023 MLB regular season.
This is the 96th player ejection of 2023. Ejection Tally: 108 Managers, 96 Players, 34 Coaches.
This is Cincinnati's 11th ejection of 2023, 2nd in the NL Central (STL 14; CIN 11; PIT 10; CHC, MIL 8).
This is Joey Votto's 1st ejection sinceJuly 10, 2021 (Doug Eddings; QOC = Y).
This is Shane Livensparger's 2nd ejection of 2023, 1st sinceMay 5 (Scott Servais; QOC = N [Balls/Strikes]).

Friday, May 5, 2023

MLB Ejection 039 - Shane Livensparger (1; Scott Servais)

HP Umpire Shane Livensparger ejected Mariners manager Scott Servais (ball three call; QOCN) in the top of the 9th inning of the #Astros-#Mariners game. With one out and one on (R1), Astros batter Kyle Tucker took a 2-2 slider from Mariners pitcher Matt Brash for a called third ball. Servais was ejected during the first mound visit/pitching change following the subject call, as inUEFL Rule 6-5-d-2. Replays indicate the pitch was located over the outer edge of home plate and thigh-high (px -0.71, pz 2.46), the call was incorrect.* At the time of the ejection, the Astros were leading, 6-4. The Astros ultimately won the contest, 6-4.

This is Shane Livensparger (43)'s 1st ejection of 2023.
*UEFL Rule 6-2-b-1 (Kulpa Rule): |0| ≤ STRIKE < |.748| ≤ BORDERLINE ≤ |.914| < BALL.
This pitch was located 0.46 horizontal inches from being deemed correct.

This is the 39th ejection report of the 2023 MLB regular season.
This is the 20th manager ejection of 2023.Ejection Tally: 20 Managers, 15 Players, 4 Coaches.
This is Seattle's 2nd ejection of 2023, 1st in the AL West (SEA 2; HOU, LAA, OAK, TEX 1).
This is Scott Servais' 1st ejection sinceAugust 26, 2022 (Dan Merzel; QOC = Y [Balls/Strikes]).
This is Shane Livensparger's 1st ejection sinceAug 27, 2022 (John Schneider; QOC = Y [Balls/Strikes]).

Wrap:Houston Astros vs Seattle Mariners, 5/5/23 | Video as follows:

Wednesday, September 21, 2022

Cleveland Loses Run, Can't Challenge After Earlier "Stands" Call

After losing an earlier challenge against Chicago, Guardians manager Terry Francona was unable to review HP Umpire Shane Livensparger's 7th inning out call on runner Amed Rosario's slide into home, which kept the game tied at three instead of Cleveland taking a 4-3 lead.

Cleveland lost its manager's challenge after a "call stands" ruling on White Sox runner Elvis Andrus' stolen base in the bottom of the 6th inning, meaning that under MLB's Replay Review regulations, the Guardians would be without a challenge for the rest of the game, including the 7th inning out call on Rosario.

Had this same sequence occurred in 2014, 2015, or 2016, however, Franconawould have been permitted not to challenge the play, but to request a Crew Chief review from Chief Todd Tichenor.

In 2017, MLB changed the Crew Chief review's first inning of eligibility from the 7th inning to the 8th inning (except for home run boundary calls, which are permitted at any time pursuant to the 2008 limited HR replay rules that predated the manager's challenge system), meaning that Cleveland came up one inning short of being able to request a Crew Chief review.

For what it's worth, the rulesprohibit Crew Chiefs from initiating reviews for non-HR boundary plays prior to the 8th inning. The rationale for MLB's 2017 change from 7th-to-8th inning starts was to deter teams from filing frivolous manager's challenges earlier in the game on plays unlikely to be overturned by Replay Review. Remember, the original purpose of replay was to correct the "obvious miss" and MLB sought fit to increase the in-game punishment for an unsuccessful challenge.

Video as follows:

Monday, August 29, 2022

Ask UEFL - Livensparger Withholds Time Out Request by Ohtani

Several minutes before HP Umpire Shane Livensparger ejected Blue Jays interim manager John Schneider, the pair met near home plate to discuss a late "Time" out request by Angels batter Shohei Ohtani, a request Livensparger ignored before adjudicating the pitch as thrown by Toronto's Yimi Garcia.

Unfortunately for Toronto, Garcia's 3-2 pitch to Ohtani resulted in a ball four call, further allowing Angels baserunner R1 David Fletcher to advance to second base without liability to be put out.

The relevant rule for this play is baseball's famed batter's box rule, Official Baseball Rule 5.04(b)(2) Comment: "Umpires will not call 'Time' at the request of the batter or any member of their team once the pitcher has started their windup or has come to a set position even though the batter claims 'dust in their eyes,' 'steamed glasses,' 'didn’t get the sign' or for any other cause."

The penalty for an untimely/late "Time" request by the batter is the same as the penalty for a batter leaving the batter's box after the pitcher comes set or starts their windup: "If the pitcher pitches, the umpire shall call 'Ball' or 'Strike,' as the case may be."

Garcia's pitch was high, and thus batter Ohtani walked on ball four with runner R1 Fletcher safely forced to second base without liability to be put out. The interesting part of the rulebook is that the defense—effectively, but not in so many words—has the option to stop play and reset: "If after the pitcher starts their windup or comes to a 'set position' with a runner on, they do not go through with his pitch because the batter has inadvertently caused the pitcher to interrupt their delivery, it shall not be called a balk. Both the pitcher and batter have violated a rule and the umpire shall call time and both the batter and pitcher start over from 'scratch.'"

But if the pitcher does complete their pitch, the delivery counts and the umpire shall call 'ball' or 'strike' without reference to the batter's violation of the batter's box (or "Time" request) rule. In no event should an umpire grant a batter's "Time" request if the pitcher has already begun their pitching motion before the batter's request is made.

Video as follows:

Saturday, August 27, 2022

MLB Ejection 146 - Shane Livensparger (2; John Schneider)

HP Umpire Shane Livensparger ejected Blue Jays interim manager John Schneider (ball four call; QOCY) in the top of the 8th inning of the #Angels-#BlueJays game. With two out and two on (R2, R3), Angels batter Mike Ford took a 3-1 curveball from Blue Jays pitcher Yimi Garcia for a called fourth ball. Replays indicate the pitch was located over the outer half of home plate and below the hollow of the knee (px 0.70, pz 1.11 [sz_bot 1.51 / RAD 1.39 / MOE 1.30]) and that all other pitches during the at-bat were properly officiated, the call was correct.* At the time of the ejection, the Angels were leading, 1-0. The Angels ultimately won the contest, 2-0.

This is Shane Livensparger (43)'s 2nd ejection of 2022.
*This pitch was located 2.33 vertical inches from being deemed incorrect.

This is the 146th ejection report of the 2022 MLB regular season.
This is the 80th manager ejection of 2022.
This is Toronto's 9th ejection of 2022, 2nd in the AL East (NYY 10;TOR 9; BOS 6; BAL 4; TB 3).
This is John Schneider's 1st ejection sinceAugust 26, 2021 (Jordan Baker; QOC = Y [Balls/Strikes]).
This is Shane Livensparger's 2nd ejection of 2022, 1st sinceApril 28 (Scott Servais; QOC = N [Balls/Strikes]).

Wrap:Los Angeles Angels of USA vs Toronto Blue Jays, 8/27/22 | Video as follows:

Monday, June 6, 2022

Teachable - Liven on a Sparger with Catch Timing

In thisTeachable,tmac points to 2B Umpire Shane Livensparger's patience and timing on a play at second base in Tampa Bay wherein the fielder may or may not have caught a ball. Although Livensparger's mechanic, in real-time, appears relatively quick, in reviewing the play more in-depth, we see that the umpire allowed the play to fully develop before rendering a decision.

A ground ball to Rays shortstop Wander Franco starts this play; with a runner on first, the play is to second and 2B Umpire Livensparger recognizes that and gets into position to officiate it. As Brandon Lowe lunges to field Franco's soft toss, Mariners baserunner R1 Eugenio Suarez enters the screen and jogs toward the base.

Livensparger follows the off-balance fielder Lowe, who has barehanded the throw, before ultimately dropping the baseball, using a safe mechanic to communicate thecatch/no catch determination (by virtue ofno catch, thus, the force out attempt also is unsuccessful).

Recall that "A CATCH is the act of a fielder in getting secure possession in his hand or glove of a ball in flight and firmly holding it" and that "It is not a catch, however, if simultaneously or immediately following his contact with the ball, he collides with a player, or with a wall, or if he falls down, and as a result of such collision or falling, drops the ball."

U2 Livensparger, having ruled that Lowe dropping the ball wasnot a voluntary and intentional release of the ball, signals safe, communicating that in his judgment, Lowe did not completely control the ball as required by rule.

Video as follows:

Thursday, April 28, 2022

MLB Ejection 016 - Shane Livensparger (1; Scott Servais)

HP Umpire Shane Livensparger ejected Mariners manager Scott Servais (strike three call; QOCN) in the top of the 6th inning of the #Mariners-#Rays game. With two out and none on, Mariners batter Julio Rodriguez took a 3-2 fastball from Rays pitcher Jalen Beeks, ruled a called third strike. Replays indicate the pitch was located over the heart of home plate and above the midpoint (px -0.08, pz 3.57 [sz_top 3.34 / RAD 3.46 / MOE 3.55]), the call was incorrect.*^ At the time of the ejection, the game was tied, 1-1. The Rays ultimately won the contest, 2-1.

This is Shane Livensparger (43)'s 1st ejection of 2022.
Shane Livensparger now has -2 points in the UEFL Standings (2 Prev - 4 Incorrect Call = -2).
Crew Chief Tom Hallion now has 0 points in Crew Division (0 Previous + 0 Incorrect Call = 0).
*This pitch was located 0.24 vertical inches from being deemed correct.

Regarding the preceding check swing vs location strike call situation on 2-1, the MLB Umpire Manual explains why confusion may have occurred (and how it may be prevented). HP Umpire Livensparger called a location strike using his right hand, as is his standard called strike mechanic. 1B Umpire Hallion, however, perhaps additionally seeing the batter and catcher looking expectantly at first base, signaled "safe" as if to rule no swing on appeal. The problem, of course, is that there was no appeal.

The MLB Umpire Manual states, regarding check swing appeals, "The preferred mechanic for asking help on a check-swing is for the plate umpire to point assertively with theleft arm directly at the appropriate base umpire while asking if the batter swung. This mechanic helps avoid confusion between an appeal and a strike mechanic."

This is the 16th ejection report of the 2022 MLB regular season.
This is the 6th manager ejection of 2022.
This is Seattle's 1st ejection of 2022, T-1st in the AL West (LAA, OAK,SEA 1; HOU, TEX 0).
This is Scott Servais' 1st ejection sinceAugust 8, 2021 (Lance Barrett; QOC = Y [Balls/Strikes]).
This is Shane Livensparger's 1st ejection sinceAugust 25, 2020 (David Bell; QOC = Y [Balls/Strikes]).

Wrap:Seattle Mariners vs. Tampa Bay Rays, 4/28/22 | Video as follows:

Tuesday, August 25, 2020

MLB Ejections 35-36 - Shane Livensparger (1-2; CIN)

HP Umpire Shane Livensparger ejected Reds 1B Joey Votto and Manager David Bell (strike calls; QOCY) in the top of the 8th inning of the #Reds-#Brewers game. With none out and none on, Votto took three consecutive pitches from Brewers pitcher Devin Williams for called first, second, and third strikes. Replays indicate the first pitch was located over the outer half of home plate and at the midpoint (px 0.42, pz 3.38 [sz_top 3.27 / RAD 3.39]), the second pitch was located over the inner edge of home plate and at the hollow of the knee (px -0.85, pz 1.50 [sz_bot 1.60 / RAD 1.48]), and the third pitch was located over the heart of home plate and above the hollow of the knee (px 0.11, pz 1.63 / sz_bot 1.60]), the call was correct. At the time of the ejections, the Brewers were leading, 3-2. The Brewers ultimately won the contest, 3-2.

These are Shane Livensparger (43)'s first and second ejections of 2020.
Shane Livensparger now has 7 points in the UEFL Standings (-1 Prev + 2*[2 AAA + 2 QOCY] = 7).
Crew Chief Tim Timmons now has 2 points in Crew Division (0 Previous + 2 Correct Call = 2).
*UEFL Rule 6-2-b-1 (Kulpa Rule): |0| < STRIKE < |.748| < BORDERLINE < |.914| < BALL.
The most controversial pitch (strike two) was located .77 horizontal inches from QOCN.

These are the 35th and 36th ejections of the 2020 MLB regular season.
This is the 17th player ejection of 2020. Prior to ejection, Votto was 0-4 (4 SO) in the contest.
This is the 14th Manager ejection of 2020.
This is Cincinnati's 2/3rd ejection of 2020, T-1st in the NL Central (CIN, PIT3; CHC 1; MIL, STL 0).
This is Joey Votto's 1st ejection sinceJuly 13, 2019 (James Hoye; QOC = N [Balls/Strikes]).
This is David Bell's 2nd ejection of 2020, 1st sinceAug 6 (Jerry Meals; QOC = N [Balls/Strikes]).
This is Shane Livensparger's 1st ejection sinceSept 10, 2017 (Scooter Gennett; QOC = Y [Balls/Strikes]).

Wrap:Cincinnati Reds vs. Milwaukee Brewers, 8/25/20 | Video as follows:

Monday, July 30, 2018

Comparison - Infield Interference or Only Obstruction?

A pair of similar-yet-seemingly oppositely-officiated plays occurred during this weekend's Nationals-Marlins and Dodgers-Braves series concerning the question of catcher obstruction (WAS-MIA) or batter interference (LA-ATL) on a batted ball in the vicinity of home plate.

Two similar plays met very different outcomes.
With both series' various broadcasters perplexed by the rulings from HP Umpire Tim Timmons (WAS-MIA obstruction) and Shane Livensparger (LAD-ATL interference)—not to mention a generous dose of "obstruction" vs "interference" terminology cross-contamination—the following analysis clarifies why the former was ruled obstruction and the latter interference.

In general, the following right-of-way rules apply:
On abatted ball, thefielder has the right to field it.*
Atany other time, therunner has the right to run.

*Onlyone fielder is entitled to right-of-way protection.

In other words, thedefault condition for contact between fielder and runner isobstruction,unless the fielder is 1) actively attempting to field a batted balland 2) receiving "protection" from the default condition of obstruction (e.g., determined to be the fielder entitled to the benefit of the rule).

Hint: We already discussed this exact issue earlier this year in both article and UEFL video form.

Related PostProtection Question - HS Obstruction on Fielding Catcher (5/22/18).

Related Video Analysis:Tangle/Untangle Between Batter-Runner and Catcher (UEFL)

Timmons ruled this Miami play obstruction.
The Play - Obstruction: With none out and one on (R1) in the bottom of the 10th inning of Saturday's Nationals-Marlins game, Marlins batter Miguel Rojas bunted a 1-0 fastball from Nats pitcher Kelvin Herrera in front of home plate, resulting in contact with catcher Spencer Kieboom as Kieboom ran toward the batted ball. HP Umpire Tim Timmons called catcher Kieboom for obstruction, awarding Rojas first base and forcing baserunner R1 Magneuris Sierra to advance to second base.

Rule - Obstruction: "OBSTRUCTION is the act of a fielder who, while not in possession of the ball and not in the act of fielding the ball, impedes the progress of any runner." (Definition of Terms). A batter-runner obstructed before he reaches first base on a ground ball or bunt to the infield is, by rule, an example of Obstruction Type 1/A (play being made on the runner at the time of obstruction...ball is dead, obstructed runner automatically awarded at least one base...6.01(h)(1)).

Livensparger ruled this ATL play interference.
The Play - Interference: With one out and one on (R1) in the bottom of the 2nd inning of Sunday's Dodgers-Braves game, Braves batter Sean Newcomb bunted a 1-0 fastball from Dodgers pitcher Ross Stripling in the air near home plate, resulting in contact with catcher Yasmani Grandal, attempting to field the ball. HP Umpire Shane Livensparger called batter-runner Newcomb for interference, awarding Grandal the air out and returning baserunner R1 Ender Inciarte to first base.

Rule - Interference: "Any runner is out when—he fails to avoid a fielder who is attempting to field a batted ball, or intentionally interferes with a thrown ball, provided that if two or more fielders attempt to field a batted ball, and the runner comes in contact with one or more of them, the umpire shall determine which fielder is entitled to the benefit of this rule, and shall not declare the runner out for coming in contact with a fielder other than the one the umpire determines to be entitled to field such a ball" (OBR 6.01(a)(10)).

Right-of-Way Protection: As 6.01(a)(10) specifies, only one fielder is entitled to the benefit or protection of the rule, known as right-of-way protection. Referring back to our right-of-way rules (batted ball = fielder;all else = runner), any fielder not given this protection may be said tonot be in the "act of fielding a batted ball," insofar as the enforcement of 6.01(a)(10) is concerned.

Analysis, Obstruction (WAS-MIA): Earlier this year, we had an extremely similar play in Reagan High School's playoff game against Lake Travis when the plate umpire ruled that the catcher obstructed the runner when the two had contact up the first base line as the catcher pursued the batted ball (as did the pitcher) and the runner attempted to advance to first base.

It all goes back to this play from May.
The Reagan-Lake Travis play best represents what occurred with Timmons, who likely ruled the pitcher, and not the catcher, was entitled to right-of-way protection. As such, the unprotected catcher's collision with the runner constitutes obstrucion, for any unprotected player is said tonot be in the "act of fielding," which means, pursuant to the aforementioned right-of-way rules, "therunner has the right to run."

Accordingly, Timmons' call iscorrect as long as thepitcher (not the catcher) is the protected fielder.

See the following related article concerning the Reagan-Lake Travis play for more information and analysis, as well as ourTangle/Untangle video that illustrates OBR 6.01(a) / NCAA 7-11f / NFHS 8-4-1.
Related PostProtection Question - HS Obstruction on Fielding Catcher (5/22/18).

Analysis, Interference (LAD-ATL): There exists a rather severe and inaccurate mythical belief that a batter-runner is protected from interference as long as the batter-runner remains in the batter's box. This is categorically false—the batter's box may shield the batter from interference insofar asrunning into a battedball is concerned—but the box does not protect a batter-runner from his obligation to avoid a fielder who is attempting to field a batted ball, as in 6.01(a)(10)...if it did, then Rule 6.01(a)(10) would mention the batter's box. Obviously, it doesn't.

To reiterate,the batter's box is not a safe space. The batter-runner may still interfere with the catcher or any other fielder attempting to field a batted ball while standing within the batter's box, assuming the catcher (or other fielder) is the fielder entitled to right-of-way protection.

The only time the batter's box protects the batter against interference is when he fouls a pitch off of his body while still in a legal position within the box, or for consideration as to a catcher's attempted play or throw back to the pitcher (MLBUM interpretation of 6.03(a)(3)...see the following related post regarding HP Umpire Dale Scott's no-call on Blue Jays catcher Russell Martin's throw back to the pitcher during Game 5 of the 2015 ALDS vs Texas that hit batter Shin-Soo Choo's bat...in the box = live ball, out of the box = dead ball). That's it.
Related PostCarefree Throw, Extended Bat, and Blue Jays Protest (10/14/15).

Armbrister's tangle in the 1975 World Series.
Rule 6.01(a)(10) Comment provides further clarity: "When a catcher and batter-runner going to first base have contact when the catcher is fielding the ball, there is generally no violation and nothing should be called." This comment is also known as an Ed Armbrister tangle/untangle, named for Armbrister's 1975 World Series entanglement with Carlton Fisk that produced a "that's nothing" ruling from HP Umpire Larry Barnett.

The Armbrister tangle/untangle only applies in the immediate vicinity of home plate, only when the catcher is the protected fielder, and only when the batter-runner is going to first base.

As we noted in our Reagan-Lake Travis analysis—citing a 2011 interference call involving batter Matt Kemp when HP Umpire Dan Iassogna called Kemp for interfering with Angels catcher Hank Conger on a ground ball in front of home plate—if the batter is not "going to first base," then 6.01(a)(10)'s commentdoes not apply and the runner is guilty of interference by failing to avoid a protected fielder attempting to field a batted ball.

In other words, if the batter—like Newcomb—stands in the box without making any effort to run or satisfy the "going to first base" criterion, then the play is not anArmbrister tangle, and the batter is liable for interference if he hinders the protected catcher.

That's precisely what happened here, and why HP Umpire Livenspargercorrectly ruled interference.

Conclusion: These are two very similar plays ruled in very opposite ways, but both rulings are proper given the differences in A) Which fielder is entitled to right-of-way protection/benefit, and B) Whether or not the batter-runner was actually running toward first base.

Video as follows:

Friday, July 20, 2018

UEFL Case Play 2018-5 - Open Baseline Tackle [Solved]

We head into the All-Star Break with our second oddity of the weekend, this time a Case Play that asks what happens when an airborne fielder and runner collide on the base paths—interference or obstruction, block or charge?

3B Umpire Shane Livensparger signals "safe."
The Play: With one out and two on (R1, R2) in the top of the 9th inning of a 9-0 ballgame, Yankees batter Didi Gregorius hit a ground ball to Orioles third baseman Jace Peterson, who threw to second baseman Jonathan Schoop as Peterson collided with Yankees baserunner R2 Clint Frazier. Schoop successfully forced out R1 Aaron Judge at second base, but Gregorius beat out the ensuing throw to first with Frazier taking third, as replays indicate Peterson did not tag him.

Case Play Question: When Frazier and Peterson collided between second and third base, umpires considered whether the former interfered with the latter, or whether it was the fielder who obstructed the runner. Replays indicate that immediately following the collision, 3B Umpire Shane Livensparger indicated "safe" (no tag, no interference, no obstruction) as 2B Umpire Chris Guccione turned to officiate the force and bona fide slide play at second base.

Is this obstruction, interference, or nothing (or both)? What is the proper outcome for this play?

Answer:This play was officiated properly.

For interference to be called, the baserunner must impede a fielder's attempt to collect a batted ballor a fielder who has fielded a batted ball from throwing the ball in the immediate aftermath of fielding the ball. Because fielder F5 Peterson successfully threw the ball before his interaction with runner R2 Frazier, the logical conclusion for interference isn't satisfied and, thus, this is not interference. In other words, by the time Frazier undercuts Peterson, the ball is away and Frazier has not impeded the fielder's ability to field nor complete his throw.

For obstruction to be called, the fielder not in the act of fielding a batted ball must impede the progress of a baserunner. This train-wreck of a collision would therefore satisfy the criteria for obstruction only if the runner is impeded from attempting to advance after the fielder has completed his throw of the batted ball. If the runner, as was the case here, appears to "give up," there can be no obstruction since there was no hindrance. Had the runner exhibited any effort to advance while the fielder continued to lie on top of him, this would be obstruction.

As it played out, this is properly no-called: there is no interference, and there is no obstruction. That said, had the defense attempted to make a play on the downed runner at third base, the umpires (primarily U3) would have to make a call (or no-call) on F5/R2's post-collision interaction. If Frazier is under the (incorrect) impression that he is out for interference, or that he has been tagged out, and willfully walks off the field, abandonment is an additional possibility.

Again, this is an intent mind-reading game the umpire must play. If the runner's attempt to advance is impeded, this is Obstruction Type 2 (no play on the obstructed runner at the time of obstruction). If he has not attempted to advance, there is no obstruction. This could theoretically turn into an Obstruction Type 1 play if, for instance, a play is attempted on the runner at third base andonly upon this attempted play does the runner attempt to advance. In this case (OBS 1/A), the runner would be awarded third on the dead ball infraction.

Official Baseball Rules Library
OBR 6.01(a)(6): "If, in the judgment of the umpire, a base runner willfully and deliberately interferes with a batted ball or a fielder in the act of fielding a batted ball with the obvious intent to break up a double play, the ball is dead. The umpire shall call the runner out for interference and also call out the batter-runner because of the action of his teammate."
OBR 6.01(a)(10): "It is interference by a batter or runner when—He fails to avoid a fielder who is attempting to field a batted ball, or intentionally interferes with a thrown ball."
OBR 6.01(h)(2): "If no play is being made on the obstructed runner, the play shall proceed until no further action is possible. The umpire shall then call 'Time' and impose such penalties, if any, as in his judgment will nullify the act of obstruction."
OBR Definitions: "Offensive interference is an act by the team at bat which interferes with, obstructs, impedes, hinders or confuses any fielder attempting to make a play."
OBR Definitions: "OBSTRUCTION is the act of a fielder who, while not in possession of the ball and not in the act of fielding the ball, impedes the progress of any runner."
MLBUM RE: 6.01(a)(10): "If, after a player has fielded a batted ball but before he is able to throw the ball, a runner hinders or impedes such fielder, the runner shall be called out for interference."

Video as follows:

Sunday, September 10, 2017

MLB Ejections 168-169 - Livensparger, Layne (CIN-NYM)

HP Umpire Shane Livensparger ejected Reds 2B Scooter Gennett (strike two and three calls; QOCY) in the top of the 7th and 1B Umpire Jerry Layne ejected Mets Manager Terry Collins (Replay Review decision overturning HP Umpire Livensparger's out call at home plate to "safe"; QOCY) in the top of the 8th inning of the Reds-Mets game. In the 7th, with two out and one on, Gennett took 2-1 and 2-2 sinkers from Mets pitcher Jerry Blevins for called second and third strikes. Replays indicate the 2-1 pitch was located over the outer edge of home plate and waist-high (px -.772, pz 2.591) and the 2-2 pitch was located over the outer half of home plate and thigh-high (px -.557, pz 1.863 [sz_bot 1.504]), the call was correct.* At the time of the ejection, the game was tied, 5-5.

In the 8th, with one out and two on (R1, R2), Reds batter Tucker Barnhart hit a 0-1 sinker from Mets pitcher Jeurys Familia on a line drive to center fielder Juan Lagares, who threw to shortstop Amed Rosario, on to catcher Travis d'Arnaud as Reds baserunner R1 Scott Schebler arrived at home plate, ruled out by HP Umpire Livensparger. Upon Replay Review as the result of a Manager's Challenge by Reds Manager Bryan Price, Livensparger's call was overturned to "safe" as replays indicate d'Arnaud failed to tag Schebler prior to his touch of home plate, the call was correct. At the time of the ejection, the Reds were leading, 7-5. The Reds ultimately won the contest, 10-5.

This is Shane Livensparger (43)'s first ejection of the 2017 MLB regular season.
This is Jerry Layne (24)'s second ejection of the 2017 MLB regular season.
Shane Livensparger now has 6 points in the UEFL Standings (1 Prev + 3 AAA + 2 Correct Call = 6).
Jerry Layne now has 7 points in the UEFL Standings (3 Previous + 2 MLB + 2 Correct Call = 7).
Crew Chief Jerry Layne now has -5 points in Crew Division (-7 Previous + 2 Correct Calls = -5).
*The 2-1 pitch was located 1.704 horizontal inches from being deemed an incorrect call.

This is the 168th, 169th ejection report of 2017.
This is the 74th player ejection of 2017. Prior to ejection, Gennett was 0-4 (2 SO) in the contest.
This is the 80th Manager ejection of 2017.
This is Cincinnati's 6th ejection of 2017, T-1st in the NL Central (CIN, MIL6; PIT 5; STL 4; CHC 3).
This is New York-NL's 3rd ejection of 2017, 4th in the NL East (MIA 6; WAS 5; ATL 4;NYM 3; PHI 2).
This is Scooter Gennett's first ejection sinceApril 10, 2015 (Mike Estabrook; QOC = Y [Balls/Strikes]).
This is Terry Collins' 2nd ejection of 2017, 1st sinceJune 1 (Fieldin Culbreth; QOC = Y-C [Interference]).
This is Shane Livensparger's first career MLB ejection.
This is Jerry Layne's 2nd ejection of 2017, 1st sinceJuly 14 (Clint Hurdle; QOC = Y ["Time" Call]).

Wrap:Cincinnati Reds vs. New York Mets, 9/10/17 | Video as follows:

Friday, June 23, 2017

Obstruction 1 or A vs 2 or B - The Difference is Crucial

Obstruction quiz: As runner Robinson Chirinos tries to evade a rundown, fielder Troy Tulowitzki—without the ball and not in the process of receiving the ball—stands in Chirinos' way back to third base and, in doing so, obstructs Chirinos. Question: Is this Obstruction 1/A or 2/B? (Note: Under the pre-2015 rules code, the terms were Obstruction A and B; under the rulebook's renumbering, the terms are Obstruction 1 and 2. A and 1 are the same, as are B and 2, and thus are used interchangeably.)

Identify this obstruction: Type A or B? 1 or 2?
Knowing the difference between the two varieties of obstruction is one thing, but parsing the rules and making a definitive call in real-time separates a field of confusion from a ballpark of understanding.

The Play: With one out and runners at the corners on Thursday afternoon in Arlington, Rangers batter Elvis Andrus hit a ground ball to Blue Jays third baseman Russell Martin, who seemingly trapped baserunner R3 Chirinos between third and home. As Martin ran Chirinos back to third, shortstop Tulowitzki shifted over and stood in front of the base, prepared to receive Martin's throw...only Martin opted not to throw to Tulowitzki, and instead dove at Chirinos, who, having collided with Tulowitzki, had not yet reached third base on his desperation lunge.

The Call and Mechanics: Nary a fortnight into his Major League umpiring career,3B Umpire Shane Livensparger immediately identified Tulowitzki's obstruction by pointing to it as the two players continued to scramble on the ground. Livensparger's point was followed by a "safe" mechanic before the call-up umpire again pointed to the obstruction. As Tulowitzki approached Livensparger to discuss the call, Livensparger called "Time."

The play approaches third base.
Aftermath: Blue Jays Manager John Gibbons initially attempted to challenge the play, and Livensparger alongside Crew Chief and home plate umpire Greg Gibson gathered at the on-field Replay Review station before quickly surmising that U3 had called obstruction, which is not subject to Replay Review. As the umpires conferred, Livensparger's Obstruction Type 1 call was affirmed and Chirinos awarded home plate, with Gibson explaining the outcome to Gibbons. [Sidebar: Score this play a fielder's choice and charge an error to Tulowitzki.]

Analysis: Livensparger properly ruled Obstruction A, but improperly employed Type B mechanics to communicate the call. Let's break down the video (via "Read More").

0:07: R3 Chirinos is obstructed by F6 Tulowitzki.This is an example of Obstruction Type A.
0:08: U3 Livensparger points to R3/F6 while the ball is live, an Obstruction Type B mechanic.
0:09: U3 Livensparger signals the runner "safe."If U3 is ruling that Chirinos beat Martin's tag back to his base,this is the proper mechanic for Type B Obstruction.If "safe" is part of his obstruction call,this is not a proper signal for either type of obstruction. Under both types of obstruction, play should be declared dead before awards are given.
0:13: U3 calls "Time" after the play ends. This cadence is an Obstruction Type B mechanic.

U3 first calls "Time" after the play concludes.
"Time" should be immediate in Obstruction A.
Proper Mechanic, Obstruction A: When Type A obstruction occurs, the umpire shall (1) immediately call "Time" to kill the play, as, by rule, the ball is dead immediately when a runner whom a play is being made on is obstructed. After the ball has been declared dead, the umpire shall (2) laterally point to the obstruction and, then, (3) impose penalties as prescribed by rule (see below).

Proper Mechanic, Obstruction B: When Type B obstruction occurs, the umpire shall (1) point to identify the infraction (laterally point and verbally declare "that's obstruction"), but keep the ball alive. When no further action is possible, the umpire shall (2) call "Time" to deaden the ball. When the ball is dead, the umpire shall (3) impose penalties as prescribed by rule (see below).

Why not signal "Safe" in real-time? When an umpire signals "safe" while the ball is live, this generally means "the tag was missed/was late," "no violation," or "ball in play." Other than during a tag play, a live ball "safe" signal when a runner collides with a fielder, such as Chirinos/Tulowitzki, would thus logically mean "no obstruction" and "no interference." It's another way of saying "that's nothing," which is quite literally the opposite of what U3 intended to call on this play. Signaling a runner "safe" on the tag is skipping a step or two of the obstruction cadence, and gives the umpire a misleading appearance of calling a runner safe who is clearly tagged with the ball while off base.

Angel Hernandez signals Obstruction Type 2.
Major Penalty Difference, A and B: Simply put, the obstructed runner in Type A obstruction is awarded at least one base beyond the base last legally touched at the time of obstruction. In a rundown situation, that means the runner gets at least the next base (if a thrown ball is in the air when OBS A occurs, and the ball subsequently goes out of play, e.g., the runner would get a standard two-base award). Other runners get "nullify the act" treatment unless forced to advance because of the obstructed runner's award. In Type B obstruction, all runners—including the obstructed runner and all other baserunners—get the "nullify the act" treatment. Because the ball is kept alive, this means that one or more of these runners may be declared out if they are tagged during the continuation of play.Obstruction 2 does not guarantee a free base (BRD: In NFHS/high school, the penalty for any obstruction [except catcher's obstruction on the batter] is an automatic one-base guarantee for the obstructed runner [nullify-the-act for everyone else]. NCAA/college carries the same penalties as OBR A and B).

Silver Lining: If you're going to use the wrong type of obstruction mechanic, it'smuch better to use Type B mechanics for a Type A call than to improperly call "Time" and incorrectly kill the play, as one would for Type A, during a Type B obstruction situation when the ball should be left alive. Of course, it's better to actually use Type A mechanics for a Type A play.

U1 uses the improper Type B point for A OBS.
In 2016, Brian Gorman's crewemployed improper mechanics on a Type 1 Obstruction play (the crew improperly kept play alive through the obstruction and until no further play was possible, as in OBS 2), but ultimately enforced the proper penalty of awarding the obstructed runner one base while placing a second baserunner at the base the crew believed he would have achieved had there been no obstruction ("nullify the act").

The Gorman crew's ruling resulted in the ejection of Brewers Manager Craig Counsell.

Obstruction A on a batter-runner.
Related Plays: In 2014, HP Umpire Greg Gibson ruled Obstruction A on a batted ball to the pitcher when the pitcher and first baseman converged on the ball while the batter-runner attempted to run by the two fielders.During that play, Gibson first (1) called "Time" (as mirrored by 1B Umpire Phil Cuzzi) before (2) laterally pointing to the obstruction and (3) awarding the batter first base.

In 2011, Jerry Layne's crew convened to rule Obstruction A on an infield ground ball where the batter-runner ran into a non-fielding pitcher standing in his base path in front of first base. Though the plate umpire was Layne and first base umpire Alan Porter, it was 2B Umpire Hunter Wendelstedt who ended up explaining the call to a dissatisfied Mariners Manager in Eric Wedge. No obstruction appeared to have been initially called on the play—either that or the mechanics were not present.

During the 2013 World Series, Jim Joyce and Dana DeMuth combined to make one of the most famous obstruction calls in Major League history.Joyce signaled Obstruction Type B as a baserunner and third baseman became entangled, allowing the baserunner to score the game's winning run as DeMuth enforced the OBS B penalty, making history as the first World Series game to end on an obstruction or interference error. Yes, DeMuth'smechanicshould have been to call "Time" before imposing the penalty, but given the circumstance, his call was still clear.

Bellino clearly conveys his Obstruction B call.
In 2010, young fill-in umpire Dan Bellino called Type B obstruction during a Reds-Nationals game, ejecting Nats Manager Jim Riggleman for arguing his ruling. Bellino's mechanics provided a perfect example for calling this brand of Obstruction B. He pointed to the infraction when it happened (presumably, while verbalizing "that's obstruction"), but allowed play to continue. When the runner was eventually tagged while off his base, and the play thus concluded,Bellino did not indicate the runner safe, but instead (1) called "Time" andthen (2) pointed back to the obstruction before (3) pointing to the awarded base and finally signaling the runner safe, in that order. Although Washington argued the call, there was no confusion or mistaking what Bellino's ruling was.

Bellino was hired to the full-time staff during the ensuing off-season.

Knowing the key differences between Obstruction Types A and B andemploying the mechanics appropriate for the type of obstruction which occurs is a simple way to establish a high level of credibility and respect on the field if and when such plays arise. Proper mechanics in these potentially confusing situations communicate to everyone that the umpire is in command, is well equipped to handle the play, and knows the rules.

By contrast, as the aforementionedincorrect mechanic examples demonstrate, failure to exercise the proper mechanic for the specific type of obstruction that occurs is a fast track toward a similar loss of credibility and control.

There are three distinct Official Baseball Rules (ok, two of them are part of the same rule) that govern obstruction (click here for a detailed look at the obstruction rules). They are:

[Definition of Terms]: "OBSTRUCTION is the act of a fielder who, while not in possession of the ball and not in the act of fielding the ball, impedes the progress of any runner."

Obstruction A: Play made on the runner.
Rule 6.01(h)(1) [formerly 7.06(a), aka Type 1 or Type A]: "If a play is being made on the obstructed runner, or if the batter-runner is obstructed before he touches first base, the ball is dead and all runners shall advance, without liability to be put out, to the bases they would have reached, in the umpire’s judgment, if there had been no obstruction. The obstructed runner shall be awarded at least one base beyond the base he had last legally touched before the obstruction. Any preceding runners, forced to advance by the award of bases as the penalty for obstruction, shall advance without liability to be put out."

Obstruction B: No play on the runner.
Rule 6.01(h)(1) Comment (relative to mechanics): "When a play is being made on an obstructed runner, the umpire shall signal obstruction in the same manner that he calls 'Time,' with both hands overhead."

Rule 6.02(h)(2) [formerly 7.06(b), aka Type 2 or Type B]: "If no play is being made on the obstructed runner, the play shall proceed until no further action is possible. The umpire shall then call 'Time' and impose such penalties, if any, as in his judgment will nullify the act of obstruction."

Saturday, June 10, 2017

Major League Debut of Umpire Shane Livensparger (43)

Umpire Shane Livensparger makes his MLB debut during Saturday's Athletics-Rays game in Tampa Bay, joining Jeff Nelson's crew for two games of the OAK-TB doubleheader, serving as first base umpire alongside HP Umpire Laz Diaz, 2B Umpire Cory Blaser, and 3B Umpire Jeff Nelson for Game 1, and as third base umpire alongside HP Umpire Doug Eddings, 1B Umpire Blaser, and 2B Umpire Nelson for Game 2.

Umpire Shane Livensparger
Photo -OfficialsHelpingWarriors.org
Livensparger is on the International League roster for the 2017 season, which is his third season in the IL and third overall in Triple-A. He has also worked the Arizona, New York-Penn, Florida Instructional, South Atlantic, Florida State, Arizona Instructional, Southern, and Arizona Fall Leagues, in addition to MLB Spring Training.

Jim Evans Academy of Professional Umpiring alum Livensparger wears the uniform number 43 at the Major League level, which was last worn byPaul Schrieber, and makes his MLB debut at the age of 33. He resides in Jacksonville Beach, Florida, is President ofOfficials Helping Warriors, and is the third new fill-in umpire to make his debut during the 2017 regular season (Ryan Additon, 5/21/17 andJohn Libka, 5/27/17).

Additon, Libka, and Livensparger all worked the 2016 AFL Fall Stars Game. The last remaining umpire to work that game yet to make his MLB debut is Nick Mahrley.

Livensparger most recently worked the plate for Thursday's IL matchup between the Charlotte Knights and Gwinnett Braves in Lawrenceville, Georgia.

Friday, September 23, 2016

2016 World Baseball Classic Qualifier Umps - Brooklyn

Umpires for the 2016 World Baseball Classic Qualifier (Brooklyn Stage) convened in Brooklyn, New York, USA and officiated the final round of qualifying games for the upcoming 2017 WBC, featuring teams from Brazil, Great Britain, Israel, and Pakistan. Six games were scheduled from September 22 - September 25.

The following is a list of the umpires who have been assigned to and appeared during this WBC stage, along with their respective countries and/or leagues of representation.

Umpire Roster for the Brooklyn, NY Qualifier round for the 2016 World Baseball Classic:
Xu Bing (China [Beijing]);
Travis Eggert (USA [Gilbert, Arizona], Pacific Coast League [PCL]);
Andrew Higgins (Canada [Edmonton, Alberta]);
Shane Livensparger (USA [Jacksonville Beach, Florida], International League [IL]);
Serge Makouchetchev (France; Confederation of European Baseball [CEB]);
Alberto Ruiz (USA [Las Vegas, Nevada], Pacific Coast League [PCL]).

*Eggert also officiated the2016 WBC Qualifier in Sydney, Australia.

Sunday, December 13, 2015

Venezuelan Ejections - Livensparger's Bench Clearer

A pickoff attempt incited a bench clearing brawl and 7 ejections in Venezuelan League action Saturday night as HP Umpire Shane Livensparger ejected Navigantes del Magellan's pitcher Bruce Rondon, catcher Jesus Sucre, substitute pitcher Jean Machi, and Bravos de Margarita 1B Jose Osuna, DH Eliezer Alonzo, and P Luis Ramirez in the bottom of the 7th inning of the Navigantes-Bravos game. 1B Umpire Robert Moreno additionally ejected Bravos Manager Henry Blanco. With none out and none on, Bravos batter Osuna was hit by a pitch from Rondon. During the ensuing at-bat, Rondon attempted to pick off baserunner R1 Osuna, resulting in an incitement and eventual bench clearing incident during which seven people were ejected. At the time of the ejections, the game was tied, 4-4. The Bravos ultimately won the contest, 6-5.

Wrap:Navegantes del Magallanes vs. Bravos de Margarita (Venezuelan League), 12/12/15
[Video posted below, via 'read more']

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp