[greymule]

Question 80 derives directly from 2002 case play situation #13 published last year on Fed's web site. The ruling caused a lot of debate here, not because it said that a runner who is hit by a batted ball is out, but because, by saying "with the shortstop . . . in position to make a catch," it implied that if the fielder were not in a position to make a play, the runner would not be out. In fact, the rest of the ruling said, "If no infielder had been in a position to make a play, the ball would remain live, provided the runner did not intentionally allow himself to be hit by the batted ball."

In other words, an undeflected ball, without passing a fielder, hits a runner, and the runner is not out! This seemed a blithe contradiction to a rule that everybody knows. I don't know that we ever resolved the controversy.

The thread is on this site: I began it on March 5, 2002, and it is entitled "NFHS Situation 13."

[Edited by greymule on Mar 11th, 2003 at 09:04 AM]