|
I've got it!
This has been bothering me all day. I've been reading the rulebook along with countless caseplays and I think I've finally figured out why this huge disparity exists between baseball and softball with regards to the "intentionally dropped fly."
I still believe that the ASA rulesmakers were trying to duplicate the intent of the baseball rule.
When the ASA interpretation says that the ball must first be "caught", I think what they *really* mean is that the ball must hit the fielder's glove in order to qualify as an intentionally dropped fly. If the ball is allowed to hit the ground, untouched, it can NOT be ruled an intentionally dropped fly.
This is the same as in baseball! The only difference is that baseball's interpretation doesn't cause any confusion by saying that the ball must first be "caught". They say that the ball must be "touched."
I think this was what the rulesmakers intended, they just made a poor choice of words which leads to confusion.
Surely, they understood that if a ball is legally "caught", that the runners can not possibly be in any jeopardy - therefore no cheap-o double play can occur.
If a fielder catches the ball and then intentionally drops it, the runners can stand there and laugh at the fielder. "Butterfingers!" No harm can come of it as long as the umpire has signaled the batter out. Nobody is forced to run.
On the other hand, if the fielder merely allows the ball to hit her glove and fall to the ground (i.e. not a catch), *then* the runners are forced to runner. This is how the defense is going to get their cheap-o double play. The spirit of this rule is to prevent EXACTLY this!
|