[CelticNHBlue]

Dave:

I don't have the book right in front of me (and I don't like to speculate without the full reading of the rule, but I will anyway) but I am thinking that this rule relates only to the batter-runner and the batted ball. If this assumption is correct, then, yes, it is that simple and here is why:

(Non Deflected Ball - Very Simple)
1 - the fair batted ball that contacts the batter out of the batters box. Dead ball, batter out (in the box, foul ball).

2 - A batted (probably bunted) fair ball that is now 10 or 20 feet down the first base line (before the running lane) contacts the batter-runner. We now have a runner contacting a ball prior to an infielder having an opportunity to make a play. Similar to #1 only away from the plate and similar to any runner being hit with a fair batted ball in front of any infielder. Dead ball, batter out.

(Now turn on your imagination)

3 - A batted fair ball past the start of the running lane that contacts the batter runner, before or after passing the infielder. If before, we have #2 again, if after we have a runner outside their running lane. Not your normal running lane violation, but it still counts. Dead ball, batter out.

In #2 if the runner makes contact in foul territory and #3 if the runner is in her/his designated location (within the running lane) we have, by definition, a foul ball because they must be entirely in foul territory to be in the running lane. (These assume the ball has contacted the ground, obviously if the ball is in the air, there are still considerations for interfering with the opportunity to make a catch, and that would be a 15 yard penalty assessed from the spot; ah, sorry I digressed into the wrong sport for a second)

(Deflected Ball - Not as simple, but still easy)
If, in #2 or #3 we have a deflected ball, the umpire now has to factor:

A - offensive location (running lane).

B - offensive intent to interfere (deliberately moving into the deflected ball)

C - defensive positioning and possible ability to still make a play (catcher backing up the play in foul territory)

D - defensive intent in deflection (player attempting to 'scoop' and tag batter runner)

This is where the argument lies as to whether or not ANY contact by the batter runner, prior to reaching first base, constitutes interference. So I will crack open the can of worms with my interpretations of the above scenarios:

In A, I have interference if the runner is not in the running lane. Again, this is their designated place to run and if they choose not to abide by this rule, they make it easy for me to get an out. If the runner is in the running lane (or prior to reaching the running lane), continue to the next situiations.

In B and C, I have interference. B is obvious, there was intent to interfere. C is equated to any runner being hit by a live ball with another player able to make a play. It is unfortunate for the runner, but the defense has the right of way. If there is no other player in position to make a play, no call.

In D, I have nothing. The defense had an opportunity to make the play and the ball was not deflected so much as it was 'guided' toward the batter-runner when the fielder attempted to make a play on the ball. The defensive intent was not to hit the batter-runner with the ball but we don't play with the 'Indian Rubber' rule in ASA. The difference here is that, once a play has been made on the ball, it is no longer a batted ball. It is now a thrown ball or a caught ball or whatever else.

In determing whether there was a play made on the ball (guided) or not (deflected), I would use similar criteria to bunted vs batted ball. Did the ball contact the fielder and deflect, or did the fielder contact the ball and redirect or guide it to another path.

I would also equate the 'guided ball' scenario to the throw that is off line that the fist baseman can't even get a glove on that hits the batter-runner. The defense has made it's play on the ball and screwed it up. Their loss. (Good luck keeping the batter runner away from the person who just put a welt on his arm.)

I would further argue that the easy call in the deflected situations (A and C) is a no call, but we don't get paid to make the easy call, we get paid to get it right.

[Edited by CelticNHBlue on Aug 16th, 2005 at 02:02 PM]