Thread: FP question
View Single Post
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Sun Apr 21, 2002, 09:57am
IRISHMAFIA IRISHMAFIA is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally posted by Dakota
Quote:
Originally posted by bluezebra
"8-2-6: Batter-runner is out when...the batter runner interferes with a dropped third strike."

Shouldn't it be 8-4 Runner is out? 8-2 isTouching, Occupying and Returning to a base.

Bob

TwoBits was quoting NFHS. In my 2001 book, you are correct, Bob. 8-2 is Touching, Occupying and Returning to a Base, and 8-4 is Runner is Out, and 8-4-1(a) deals with BR interference with a third strike, and it uses the wording of interfering with the catcher's attempt to field.

I don't have a NFHS 2002 book, but I understand NFHS completely rewrote Rule 8 so perhaps for 2002 8-2 is the right reference. Some of you guys must have the NFHS 2002 book handy, right?
My misunderstanding as Bob did not quote a specific post and his reply directly followed mine.

However, regardless of the book, I do not believe you can hold the BR liable for the catcher's inability to control the ball. Should we require the BR to locate the ball prior to attempting to advance to 1B on a DTS? Other than one being a batted ball and the other a muffed catch, what is the difference between this scenario and a runner making unintentional contact with deflected batted ball?

__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote