Quote:
Originally Posted by BoomerSooner
Here is the language in 10.8 prior to listing the scenarios and the outcomes for each:
"Simultaneously, the umpire gives the delayed dead-ball signal and waits to suspend play until the non-contacted pitch has reached the plate, or the play has been completed. Assuming no other violation has occurred (for example, leaving early):"
While not explicitly stating so, a non-contacted pitch results in a dead ball once it has reached the plate. I've never worked NCAA, but a similar scenario is a runner a runner trying to steal a base (regardless of the count) and the pitch is illegal. Even though the attempt to steal a base is still in progress and thus a play is ongoing, the explanation that was given was that ball is dead on the non-contacted pitch because that part of the rule takes precedence. I guess the idea is not to put the defense in jeopardy of trying to make an attempt to retire a runner that would be awarded the base she is trying to advance to anyway. I don't know if that is right or not, but that is what was discussed between two umpires I was sitting near during a meeting.
If that ruling is correct, I would say that the application of this to the OP results in the ball being dead because it was a non-contacted illegal pitch. I'll restate that I don't know if this is the right ruling or the right reasoning for the ruling, but hopefully it adds something to the conversation.
|
I think the "OR" is rather important.
Sit 1: If a runner is stealing, there is still a play. R1 steals second and the ball is thrown into center field, allowing the runner to advance to third. In this case, the coach has an option.
Sit 2: The pitch is (in and of itself) ball four - the batter awarded first is still the "play".
FWIW, I have never been instructed, not even remotely, to kill a non-contacted illegal pitch, and surprised it has never come up until now.