[IRISHMAFIA]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by WestMichiganBlue

MIKE: If the umpire judges that the defender did not have a shot at catching this low throw, it is very possible that there was no violation.

The ball hit the runner; otherwise we probably have no call. Therefore that ball was anywhere from zero to 6'-7' off the ground, and in-line with the thrower and the fielder at 1B. I will make no assumptions about the ability of the fielder to make that catch IF the ball get to her.

Actually, the scenario to which I was responding specifically stated that the ball hit the BR in the foot. I just raised the possibility of it not being interference, I never stated that it wasn't. I agree that no assumptions on the 1B ability should come into play.

MIKE: You may be looking at the wrong end of the play. . . . for the BR to be ruled out is totally reliant on whether their action interferes with the fielder taking the throw at 1B

I think that you are reading that too narrow. It would suggest that the runner must be on top of (or close) to the fielder to directly interfer with her. But the rule covers a violation that may occur anywhere up to 30' away (the length of the 3' lane). IMHO, if the ball is stopped or deflected away, that action has prevented the fielder from making the play.

I am trying to judge the "intent" of the rule. It seems to me that the rules makers wanted to guarantee the runner a direct path to 1B, which then required the fielder to adjust their throw to miss the runner. But if the runner is out of her "safe" zone and ends up in a direct line from the thrower to the receiver, then she is no longer protected. Even if she is not hit by the throw. If the ball zings by her ear or under her arm the fielder may not pick up sight of the ball soon enough to make the catch. IMO, that could be interference.

I believe I am reading it exactly how it was meant to play out. The rule book couldn't be more specific and since I wasn't involved in the wording of this rule, I will accept as published unless directed otherwise. There is no rule effecting an out just for the BR being hit by a thrown ball while out of the lane unless intentional on behalf of the runner. The runner can only be called out for interfering with the ability of the defender covering 1B to make an out.

Now, admittedly, that is "seeing the result" of the play. But it happens so fast. The throw goes by the runner and the fielder misses it in a fraction of a second - you're throwing up your hands and killing the play.

The key here is knowing the players and where they are on the field. If there is no one covering 1B or that individual is, in your judgment going to arrive too late to get an out, there is no interference. If the kid throwing the ball couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with the ball from 5', you are going to want to see her actually throw the ball in the direction of 1B.

Remember this was a POE for FED ball last spring. We were instructed to enforce this. We covered it in pre-game. Maybe we called it a little too liberally, but the effects were to get those runners back into the lane (especially sub-varsity). We called it, and the coaches coached it. I also think that it was a safety issue. Most FP softball batters are forward in the batter's box, and then run a line from that point to 1B, all in fair territory, on a collision course with F4. By forcing the issue, we found that batters were running the lane even when the throw was from somewhere other than behind them.

WMB


The last thing I remember about the Fed's push on this rule was calling a walked BR out for a lane violation. This topic was raised, and mocked, at almost every clinic or school I attended whether NFHS or ASA.

And, while you brought up the subject, every BR is on a collision course with F4 or whichever player is covering 1B regardless of where they start or run and that will never change until the coaches start teaching the girls how to play the position.

Why is it that they don't seem to have this type of problem with the boys? It isn't because they have farther to run, but because they are taught the proper mechanics at 1B.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one, WMB.