|
|
Post by Rodeo Jock on Sept 18, 2006 8:39:53 GMT -4
Ok, so everyone knows how much I hate the no-manbunt rule and how the refs are somehow supposed determine "intent" when men kick, but I have issues with how manbunts were/n't called in our game yesterday.
How does one call this:
a ball is kicked about waist high, lands behind the pitcher close to the baseline, and continues between 2nd and 3rd into left center advancing the kicker to first and, due to errors, the runner already on first to third.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scottyg on Sept 18, 2006 8:51:27 GMT -4
Was the ball really kicked? I think its more intent with the swing/kick than it is where the ball goes. Usually you can tell when a person is bunting the ball because of the way they set up for it.
Just like there can be terrible kicks that end up as a full swing that goes right into the ground, there can be bad bunts that end up going farther than expected. Its the refs call, and its still a relatively new thing for refs, especially if you've been reffing for the teams that always kick hard.
Usually if its making its landing beyond the pitcher I wouldnt think it to be a bunt, then again the ninja kick you'd need to kick a waist high pitch baffles me as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rodeo Jock on Sept 18, 2006 9:06:01 GMT -4
There were several versions of this during our game. They were by no means "full on, send it to the outfield kicks," but they were not "use the inside of your foot obviously intentional bunts" that ended in the no-encroachment area.
It seems to me now, that if a man intentionally kicks light or short, some refs are assuming it's a manbunt and not a short kick/line drive. It's not like the guys were doing that "put it just in front of the plate" bunt like girls do. They were kicked to the infield. My understanding when we voted for this rule was to end the practice of everyone bunting the ball in front of the 1st/3rd diagonal making the game harder to field and lessen the fun.
If this rule is going to continue, there needs to be some serious delineation between short kicks and bunts. If men are not allowed to strategically kick to the infield, we've removed the ability to use strategy and ending up with a men drive it into the outfield and women always bunt division.
|
|
|
|
Post by djtitoramon on Sept 18, 2006 11:21:14 GMT -4
I made some of those badly called kicks. It seems that anything that I deliver that doesn't soar into the outifield is in danger of being a bunt. My intent is not to bunt, but sometimes i would like to keep it on the ground or send the ball through the infield.
|
|
Dagger
Captain
Go Wackos Go!
Posts: 1,547
|
Post by Dagger on Sept 18, 2006 12:37:41 GMT -4
Yes Patrick, your team had many questionable kicks. I will say this. Flame On has stepped up its compettitive juices. Congrats on your win.
You can complain all you want. I haven't seen you ref one game yet. The refs have been pretty good this year. Cut the refs some slack.
|
|
|
|
Post by felinegroovy on Sept 18, 2006 12:54:18 GMT -4
harsh much, Marvie?
|
|
Dagger
Captain
Go Wackos Go!
Posts: 1,547
|
Post by Dagger on Sept 18, 2006 13:00:41 GMT -4
Not really, Patrick was very passionate about those calls. Being a captain, I don't blame him. Being the ref, I could only tolerate it so much. It was a close game with many close calls.
**just a game** **just a game**
|
|
|
|
Post by Scottyg on Sept 18, 2006 13:05:07 GMT -4
Arguing over this type of kick is kind of tough as you really have to be there to catch intent/distance. The ref made the call and if the call is consistent for both teams then play on. If you are setting your feet and chipping the ball its most likely going to be called by a ref.
Its the first season we've played with this rule, its going to take some hashing out before people have an exact idea of what they can and cannot do both from the kicking and reffing standpoint, and I've seen very few manbunt calls as most teams are kicking away.
On the opposite side, I'd call my bunts based more on how the kicker attempts contact than where it ends up. Your pitcher and your shortstop are still going to have to play some shorter kicks. Again you can nail the ball and have it go 2 feet, you can set up for a bunt and have it go deep into the infield. Refs have the call, and as much shite as they've been getting, I have to say they've been really good this year. I'm sure we can revisit this at least before playoffs to get refs on the same page
|
|
Dagger
Captain
Go Wackos Go!
Posts: 1,547
|
Post by Dagger on Sept 18, 2006 13:06:15 GMT -4
I made some of those badly called kicks. It seems that anything that I deliver that doesn't soar into the outifield is in danger of being a bunt. My intent is not to bunt, but sometimes i would like to keep it on the ground or send the ball through the infield. Not sure about badly called, but check with the ref before you kick to see what he/she thinks. Break for refs please!  No more comments from me on this thread.... I am happy that Flame On has done well this season. The defense has stepped up big time! |
|
|
|
Post by t0ken on Sept 18, 2006 13:26:37 GMT -4
If it is agreed that it is up to the ref then there can be some argument to get your point across but once he/she makes the call then that's it. I both agreed and disagreed with Marvie's calls yesterday but it is hard to judge intent.
Personally, I used my instep to better angle the ball towards the left side of the infield but it was not a bunt because I followed thru on the kick but there might be a ref out there who would call it a bunt and I would argue it but I would have lost because I am usually the one trying to kill it into the outfield.
John's manbunt call I disagreed with because the ball simply dropped faster then he expected and it grazed off the bottom of his foot but he also followed thru.
Patrick I did not see your kick as my fat ass was still catching my breath from running from 1st to home and Derek I might have called one of yours a man bunt just cause at the end of your kick you seem to pull back and try to just tap it. Now I know that was not your intent but the ref can't know that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rodeo Jock on Sept 18, 2006 13:35:56 GMT -4
Yes Patrick, your team had many questionable kicks. I will say this. Flame On has stepped up its compettitive juices. Congrats on your win. You can complain all you want. I haven't seen you ref one game yet. The refs have been pretty good this year. Cut the refs some slack. Thanks Marvin. And believe me, I do not envy your position as a head ref at all. I don't ref for many reasons, the main being that as a Team Captain being the point person that will have to argue calls, I think it's a conflict of interest to also BE a ref (head or line). I also never took the plunge because, until this season, there has always been other DC Star business on my plate. That said, it doesn't mean I'm unfamiliar with the rules. I appreciate everything the refs do and know that they (for the most part) put a lot of effort into what they do. I have the utmost respect for the head refs since no matter what, you will get called names behind your back by one team, player, or captain or another. My point is that the manbunt is not defined well enough this season. I don't think any kick (man or woman) that ends up behind the 1st/3rd diagonal for the most part is a bunt, intended or otherwise. So, YAY REFS!! BOO NO-MANBUNT RULE!! |
|
|
|
Post by t0ken on Sept 18, 2006 13:43:49 GMT -4
I still go back to the fact that if the 3rd grade versions of ourselves saw us arguing over rules in a kickball game that they would kick the crap out of us.
That being said, there does need to be a more defined rule with regards to manbunt. "Intent" just leaves way to much out there.
Oh and YAY me for finally going over 100 posts. Not bad for 3 seasons huh
|
|
|
|
Post by Scottyg on Sept 18, 2006 14:06:36 GMT -4
Well there would never be anyone bunting to argue over the call...its a first try at tweaking the rule for a little more participation. I dont know if we have the time to get everyone together to argue over the nuances, but I'm sure if we see it back in Fall of 07 there will be a little more instruction on how to call it from experience.
I think its a made play a lot more interesting, and coupled with the pitching change has definately led to a shakeup of DC Star standings and of players getting a chance to do more than watch the game from the outfield.
|
|
|
|
Post by t0ken on Sept 18, 2006 14:21:30 GMT -4
I agree it has given the outfielders much more to do then just stand there picking flowers. The truth is if we all had catchers like the once craigslist miss connected Jesse then we wouldn't need the manbunt rule but we don't all have spastic, speedy little midgets with a good arm to play back there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rodeo Jock on Sept 18, 2006 14:32:01 GMT -4
I agree with you Scooter and T0ken, but I also think it's removed a key tactical play from one gender. Cause looking at our own Defense, Pete, as soon as a woman comes up, we move in and then when a man comes up, we move back. And true to form, most teams are having their men boot it and then rely on their women to bunt. And it seems that for the most part, that's all the women are doing.
I do think there is a compromise in here somewhere. It may be a more defined rule, it may be saying all kicks my pass the diagonal or be foul, or no bunting at all... I don't know. Either way, I like the games more this season (even the ones we've lost/tied) than in the spring, partly due to the change in everyone's playing style to make up for the lack of manbunts. It's helped some, it's hurt some.
|
|
