Quote:
Originally Posted by Dakota
Problem is, it was not a BR that was running. A batter cannot be put out by either F2 or F3.
|
Then a Quote of the rule:
The catcher shall return the ball directly to the pitcher after each pitch, except after a strikeout, a put out or an attempted put out made by the catcher.
EXCEPTION: Does not apply with a runner(s) on base or the batter becoming a batter-runner.
Guess I am reading what I want to into the rule to attempt to be fair, IMO. I am not going to award the offense for them drawing a throw. To me I am going to rule this throw as an attempted put out. IMO the batter/runner running to first caused the F2 to attempt to put her out by making that throw. True F2 could not actually have put her out as she was not legally a BR at that time...but F2 was IMJ attempting a put out, thus relieving her from the ball on the batter penalty. Would this ruling hold up under protest? I am not sure depends on who the UIC is and how they interpret the rules. Personally I think in most cases I could keep it from ever getting to a protest level, by selling the ruling and adding judgement into the conversation enough to make the coach think there is nothing to protest, since they can't protest on judgement. Those who are going to slam me for being unfair to the offense can bite me
it's not fair to award a ball on the batter for an incorrect action by the batter. If we consistantly did that then how long will it take before coaches are teaching to run on ball 3 every time?
The more I think about this, what is an attempted put out? A throw back to a base to attempt a pick off? Not in this case, the exception totally removes this rule when there is a runner(s) on base. So it isn't that....so I ask you what is an attempted put out, with no runners on base and no batter-runner?? Cause that is the only time this rule even applies.... I judge that this attempted put out is exactly what we are talking about! I am ready to be proven wrong but want some rules references to do it!!