D3K, out of RL causes bad throw

MD Longhorn

ASA ONLY (Fed differs, so let's just discuss ASA).

Dropped 3rd strike deflected off of the catcher: BR, running outside the running lane, causes F2 to throw errant.

I know this is a nothing in ASA - ASA requires a quality throw in order to rule interference. But I'm looking for a case play to back it up. I don't have those here. Anyone have one?

BretMan

No reference literature on hand at the moment, but...

Is FED really different? I know that FED baseball rules this as interference. Isn't FED softball the same as ASA (ie: requires quality throw)?

AtlUmpSteve

MD Longhorn wrote
ASA ONLY (Fed differs, so let's just discuss ASA).

Dropped 3rd strike deflected off of the catcher: BR, running outside the running lane, causes F2 to throw errant.

I know this is a nothing in ASA - ASA requires a quality throw in order to rule interference. But I'm looking for a case play to back it up. I don't have those here. Anyone have one?

We have a rule (8.2-E) that makes it interference for the BR, by running outside the running lane, to, in the umpire's judgment, interfere with the fielder "taking the throw". Since the only applicable rule doesn't make it interference to cause F2 to make an errant (or non-quality) throw, why do we need a case play for what isn't covered by the rule?

MD Longhorn

AtlUmpSteve wrote
We have a rule (8.2-E) that makes it interference for the BR, by running outside the running lane, to, in the umpire's judgment, interfere with the fielder "taking the throw". Since the only applicable rule doesn't make it interference to cause F2 to make an errant (or non-quality) throw, why do we need a case play for what isn't covered by the rule?

Some want to use 8-2-F-2 here, stating her presence where she wasn't supposed to be interfered with the fielder.

Yes, I know that's not correct... but I'd have sworn I'd seen case plays to this effect more than once.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Regardless of Rules Set. Please define a "quality throw" that would then trigger an interference call. Thanks.

MTD, Sr.

MD Longhorn

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. wrote
Regardless of Rules Set. Please define a "quality throw" that would then trigger an interference call. Thanks.

MTD, Sr.

A throw that would likely retire the runner.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

MD Longhorn wrote
A throw that would likely retire the runner.

So if F2's throw plunks the B/R between the shoulder blades, that is a "quality throw" but if F2 attempts to throw over the B/R so as not to plunk the B/R between the shoulder blades and throws over the had of F3 that is not a "quality throw"?

MTD, Sr.

Andy

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. wrote
So if F2's throw plunks the B/R between the shoulder blades, that is a "quality throw" but if F2 attempts to throw over the B/R so as not to plunk the B/R between the shoulder blades and throws over the had of F3 that is not a "quality throw"?

MTD, Sr.

yep......

MD Longhorn

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. wrote
So if F2's throw plunks the B/R between the shoulder blades, that is a "quality throw" but if F2 attempts to throw over the B/R so as not to plunk the B/R between the shoulder blades and throws over the had of F3 that is not a "quality throw"?

MTD, Sr.

Are you arguing or asking? Thought you were asking...

F2 is supposed to throw the ball to F3 to retire the runner. Just like they are supposed to if BR is in the lane. F2 is not rewarded for a crappy throw if BR gets in the way of it. F3 is supposed to do exactly what they would have had BR not been in the wrong place. It's that simple.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

MD Longhorn wrote
Are you arguing or asking? Thought you were asking...

F2 is supposed to throw the ball to F3 to retire the runner. Just like they are supposed to if BR is in the lane. F2 is not rewarded for a crappy throw if BR gets in the way of it. F3 is supposed to do exactly what they would have had BR not been in the wrong place. It's that simple.

It was a question/what if request. And thanks for the answers.

MTD, Sr.

EsqUmp

"Quality Throw" - One capable of retiring the batter-runner.

DaveASA/FED

It feels like there is a lot of discussion about the "quality throw". I think this idea needs to leave our thoughts. The interference rule deals with a batter runner that "interferes with the fielder taking the throw at first base". There is nothing about the throw, or how good the throw has to be or the batter runner causing a bad throw. It is judgement and we have to judge that the batter runner interfered with the fielder taking the throw at first base, for them to interfere there has to be a play to interfere with which means the throw has to be able to be caught at first base and the batter runner kept it from being able to be caught.

MD Longhorn

DaveASA/FED wrote
It feels like there is a lot of discussion about the "quality throw". I think this idea needs to leave our thoughts. The interference rule deals with a batter runner that "interferes with the fielder taking the throw at first base". There is nothing about the throw, or how good the throw has to be or the batter runner causing a bad throw. It is judgement and we have to judge that the batter runner interfered with the fielder taking the throw at first base, for them to interfere there has to be a play to interfere with which means the throw has to be able to be caught at first base and the batter runner kept it from being able to be caught.

There's a lot of discussion about it because it's taught that way in clinics, and it's the way TPTB want it ruled.

DaveASA/FED

Which powers that be are we talking about?

UmpireErnie

If F2s throw cannot be caught by F3 because it's over her head is NOT interference. It does not matter where the BR is. Nothing was interfered with and F3 better go get the ball.