[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by WestMichBlue
Discussion about a ball thrown into DBT by a fielder attempting to get a runner that left the base early. Situation: R1 on 1B, stealing on the pitch. Line drive is caught by F6 who immediately fires to 1B, but overthrows into DBT. R1 had conceded and didn’t even try to return. Umpire calls Dead Ball, looks for R1 and points to 3B.

ASA added a statement in 2003 to 8.5.G EFFECT: “once a base runner advances to and passes the next awarded base, the runner may no longer return to touch any base left too soon.”

Q #1: What is the next awarded base? Batter is awarded two bases from TOT, so she goes to 3B. Is 2B or 3B the “next” awarded base?

Make up your mind. You offer a scenario with the BR being put out and now you want to award him bases.

I'll assume you meant R1. R1 would be awarded 3B, but is still subject to retouching 1B and all bases in between.

Q #2: Rule says “advances to and passes the next . . . . . It does not say “And/Or.” So if 2B is the “next awarded base” and R1 touches 2B when Coach yells at her to return and touch 1B – can she? If she takes a step past 2B, is she now prevented from returning to 1B?

That is correct, only the wording of the rule has been changed to elminate the word "passes". Ever so subtle, but affects the rule nonetheless.

EXCEPTION #2: “When the ball becomes dead, runners may return to touch a base left too soon if they have advanced, touched, and are a base beyond the base left too soon.”

Now what the hell does that say? If they have not advanced, touched, and are a base beyond – are they prevented from returning? If they have advanced two bases beyond – are they prevented from returning?

It means that when the ball goes dead, it does NOT prevent the runner from completing their running assignments. An umpire is not to accept any appeals, nor should the award any bases until they are satisfied the runner has completed their task.

Further down in the Exception is the statement “A runner shall not be declared out if a fielder deliberately carries or throws the ball into DBT to prevent the runner from returning to a base left too soon.” Now this would suggest that a runner is NOTeligible to return if the ball is dead, however we won’t let a fielder trap the runner by deliberately throwing the ball into DBT. But that doesn’t make sense – in ASA, why would a fielder deliberately throw the ball into DBT?

This is there because a few years ago, a runner was not permitted to return to touch a missed base or base left too soon once the ball became dead. It didn't take long before one of the very few smart players figured out that if the threw the ball out of play after catching it, the runner who was already passed the next base could not return to touch a base they left too soon. Even though the rule has been changed, ASA left this caveat in the rules to cover any other (until now unknown) instance where intentionally killing the ball would deter the runner from returning.

FINALLY TO NFHS. When the NFHS re-wrote Rule 8 a couple years ago to more closely match ASA, we know that NFHS and ASA technocrats collaborated on this effort. When the EXECPTION was printed in the NFHS book (8.4.g, Exception #2) it said “When the ball becomes dead, no runner may return to touch a base left too soon if she has advanced, touched and remains a base beyond the base left too soon.”

Which is the rule to which I'm referring to above. ASA reversed themselves, and apparently, the Fed did not.


[b][quote]
The only difference between the ASA and NFHS words in that sentence is the word “NO,” and it totally changes the meaning of the rule. Fact is, the NFHS sentence is logical, while the ASA sentence, as I noted above, has no meaning.

Now, when NFHS copies the rest of the Exception to include the part about a fielder not deliberately throwing into DBT, it all makes sense. I remember clearly in our NFHS Rules Meetings two years ago the emphasis on not allowing a fielder to violate the intent of the new rule by deliberately throwing into DBT.

The following question is possibly going to offend ASA devotees, but here goes. Did the ASA and NFHS technocrats get it right when they wrote the NFHS version; and did ASA fail to fix their rule? OR – did ASA botch the revision a year later when they added the 2003 revision quoted above? (passes next awarded base, can not return etc.)

WMB

[Edited by IRISHMAFIA on Apr 29th, 2004 at 11:59 AM]