|
I realize this thread is three weeks old, but I decided to re-read this post after Dakota make a typical derogatory statement on another board ("they (NFHS) have the diamond sports world's dumbest possible interpretation of a running lane violation after a base on balls.")
It seems as though half of this thread was in trying to define the ASA position, and half was NFHS bashing. I think that maybe Cecil was the only one that had it right by saying "its history, folks!"
From a NFHS perspective, I agree that a walked batter (batter-runner) can not be charged with interference prior to reaching 1B. I base that on my 2003 books.
8.2.5 says a batter-runner is out if: "She runs outside the three-foot lane and, in the judgment of the umpire, interferes with the fielder taking the throw at first base. And 8.2.6 says that: "A batter-runner being hit with a thrown ball does not necessarily constitute interference.
ASA has the indentical wording, except that "she" is replaced by "batter-runner." Both books say that a batter becomes a batter-runner when a fourth ball is called by the umpire.
NFHS Casebook 8.2.6, covering a slightly different situation, states that "Since no play is made on (batter-runner) at first base, 8.2.5 does not apply.
I believe I can take that statement and apply it to a walked batter-runner when the catcher is throwing the ball to 1B. Because the B-R has been awarded 1B, no play can be made on her until, and if she goes past 1B. (ie., trying to draw a throw and get a runner home from 3B.) Thus the catcher is simply trying to relocate the ball for a future possible play should the batter try to advance. Thus - if no play is being made on the B-R at 1B, 8.2.5 does not apply.
I believe that is the NFHS position in 2003. Does anyone have access to anything (written) that disagrees?
WMB
[Edited by WestMichBlue on Sep 25th, 2003 at 12:01 AM]
|