Quote:
Originally Posted by Manny A
Semantics. Or are you suggesting that the case book ruling is not enforceable since it isn't an actual rule? I guess I'm missing your point here.
We have an authoritative NFHS interpretation on how to handle the three scenarios I proposed. So what if the actual rule the interpretation references doesn't specifically mention a batted ball in foul territory? It is clear to me that the case book play directs us that a batted ball that the umpire judges may go fair, is treated exactly the same, for all intents and purposes under 8-2-6, as a batted ball in fair territory.
|
My point is not that it is not authoritative, but that the softball rules interpreters have a track record of putting their hobby horses into official interpretations. Further, the rule does specifically mention fair batted ball, at least implying that the rules committee/writers were making a distinction. It is generally a lot easier to add an interpretation to a case play than to change the rule, leaving case plays somewhat at the mercy of said hobby horses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manny A
The applicable rule could be 8-6-10 or 8-6-11 if NFHS felt this infraction was commensurate with their 8.2.6.B case book interpretation. I'm willing to bet that if you asked this question to the NFHS powers-that-be, they may very well add a case book play under 8.6.11 to answer your question.  As it stands right now, however, there is no written rule or interpretation.
Does that mean that NFHS gives other runners carte blanche permission to intentionally contact foul balls that umpires judge may go fair, while specifically prohibiting batter-runners from doing so? Or does that mean they've inadvertently left this unaddressed? I'm guessing it's the latter.
C'mon, Tom. Why on God's green earth would B1 (a) kick or (b) hit the ball with her bat in the given case play? I'm fairly confident it would be an easy sell for me to explain to B1's coach what I judged happened here.
As for R1, my answer to your Question 1 applies. |
Why on God's green earth? You are kidding, right? Bats are generally tossed and runners are generally running in foul territory between 3B and home and between home and 1B.
Bottom line: this is someone's idea of what is "fair" and is not backed by the rules themselves. It requires the umpire to read the mind of the BR/R and further to determine what "has a chance" or "could become fair" means. Where is the line here? Does "has a chance"/"could become fair" include ALL slow rollers? Does it include a ball rolling away from the foul line but with enough speed so a bump in the dirt could change its direction? "In foul ground" is a firm situation. I wish someone WOULD demand to know why R1 is treated differently from BR in this situation. The hue and cry from coaches if such a change was attempted would at least be entertaining... ever heard coaches tell runners on 3B to advance in foul territory and retreat in fair? What happens to that? JMO.