Quote:
Originally posted by Dakota
Quote:
Originally posted by Dakota
Rule 8-2E (running lane rule) applies to every batter-runner. The BR can be called out for being out of the running lane and interfering with the fielder taking the throw at 1st base after receiving the BOB....
Example (more to the point): B1 gets a BOB. BR takes off at full run to 1st. F2 throws down to F3. Ball hits BR, who is running in fair territory.
IMO, this could be ruled interference. ...
|
Mike (and others),
You are saying that the above quotes from my initial posting in this thread are false? IOW, you are saying that the ASA interpretation of 8-2E is as follows,
"When the batter-runner runs outside the three-foot lane and, in the judgment of the umpire, interferes with the fielder taking the throw at first base for the purpose of retiring the BR...?
I.e. since the BR cannot be retired by the throw, the running lane does not apply.
If this is the correct ASA interp, I am more than willing to correct my understanding and interpretation of this rule. But, it would help if the rule, or a POE, or a case play, clearly said that.
|
No where. The difference is that the BR is, by rule, entitled to advance to 1B on a BOB without liability to be put out. Your assumption that they can be ruled out for other infractions is accurate.
However, for interference to occur, the offensive player must be doing something to prevent the defense from executing a play. Now the question comes, "Where is there a play?"
The BR is entitled to advance to 1B, so there is no imminent play on her. The fact that she
MAY come off the base is irrelevant at the time of the throw.
So, to rule the BR out would be doing so for interfering with a play that doesn't exist at the time of the INT should that be what the umpire calls.
I think NFHS is stretching it a bit because somewhere along the way a player got hit and they didn't know how to handle it, so they created an interpretation.
As Steve said, ASA and NCAA do not support such a ruling.