View Single Post
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Mon Apr 03, 2006, 09:00pm
AtlUmpSteve AtlUmpSteve is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Woodstock, GA; Atlanta area
Posts: 2,822
Quote:
Originally Posted by NSABlue
I sure wish that the FED would issue a clarification for this type of play. My local association had quite a bit of discussion on this type of play, basically one where a B-R takes off for first base thinking there is a D3K when that is not the actual situation. There was so much discussion that our UIC went to the FED to get a ruling. He was told to go to our State Rules Interpretor. Mr Kotowski (Maryland) issued a ruling that said anytime a runner takes off for first base, when she is not entitled to do so and draws a throw from the catcher, the runner is called out for interference, ball is dead and no other runners can advance. I totally disagree with this ruling. I believe the defense is responsible for knowing the situation and the ball is alive and in play, runners may advance at their own risk. However, I will use the State Rules Guru's ruling until I'm told to do otherwise.
I wonder if your State Rules Guru has read 8-6-18 (my 2005 book, it may be a different cite in 2006); it specifically states that a batter-runner running on the third strike rule (even when not entitled to do so) is NOT guilty of interference. "A runner continuing to run and drawing a throw may be considered a form of interference. This does not apply to a batter-runner running on the dropped third strike rule."

This isn't gray; it's black letter law.
__________________
Steve
ASA/ISF/NCAA/NFHS/PGF
Reply With Quote