So we all know (or should know) how the running lane works in ASA. Rule 8-2-E dictates how that works.
ASA published a
rule interpretation in April 2007 that expands the rule to a certain degree.
In our training class last week, a question arose related to the double base and the running lane: If a throw is coming from the foul side, and the defender sets up on the colored bag, the runner can run to the white bag, and the running lane shifts to the fair side of the foul line.
By rule, if the "
defensive player uses the colored portion of the double base, the batter-runner can run in fair territory when the throw is coming from the foul side of first base, and if hit by the thrown ball, it is not interference." The April 07 rule interpretation tries to clarify this some by stating that "
an exception is made when the ball is being thrown from the foul side of first base. In this case, the three-foot running lane transfers to the fair side of the foul line where the runner is protected while running to the white portion of first base."
My questions: (all assuming the throw comes from foul side)
- If the defender sets up on the colored portion, does the running lane "move" to fair side, or does it effectively become 6-feet wide straddling the foul line?
- If the defender sets up on the colored bag, the rule says that the batter-runner "can run in fair territory." If they don't - say they choose to run in foul, and get hit by a thrown ball while in the marked running lane, is it interference? Basically, does it eliminate the batter-runner's protection if they are in the regular running lane as well?
My thought is that the rule interpretation says the running lane "
transfers to the fair side" - thereby eliminating the regular lane in foul territory. But in my mind this conflicts with the written rule that the batter-runner "
can run in fair territory".
Thoughts?