|
Mon Jun 28, 2004, 10:06am
|
|||
|
|||
|
I ususally stay in the softball board but I was told about a situation that happened in Dixie baseball that I wondered about.
R1 on first, defense playing behind the bag. Batter hits a soft popup toward first base, in front of the defense. R1 steps off 1st with one foot, then brings foot back to the base. R1 is has both feet on the base and the ball hits his leg and caroms toward second base as the defender is coming in. BU calls R1 out because he was hit by the ball. Seems to me that vacating the base to avoid interference would put him in jeopardy of being tagged out or doubled up if catch was made. Isn't the base considered a safe haven?
__________________
MCPO(SW) USN(Ret.) Softball Addict Mississippi Gulf Coast 
|
|
Mon Jun 28, 2004, 11:00am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Depends.
The runner has every right to stay on the base. I'd need intent by the base runner before I called interference. I would consider it intentional if the runner made no attept to avoid the ball while touching the base. G.
|
|
Mon Jun 28, 2004, 11:06am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Then you'd be calling it wrong, Gee. If the runner is hit by a batted ball when an infielder has a play, he's out. The rules make no provisions for a player remaining safe on the base. He certainly could have remained on the base and not gotten hit by the ball, if he had chose to do so (foul ground, perhaps?).
|
|
Mon Jun 28, 2004, 11:20am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Don't think so.
"He certainly could have remained on the base and not gotten hit by the ball, if he had chose to do so (foul ground, perhaps)?."
--------------------------- Didn't see the play but I covered the fact that the runner should make every effort to avoid the ball and in general J/R agrees with me. G.
|
|
Mon Jun 28, 2004, 12:10pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Depends.
Quote:
|
|
Mon Jun 28, 2004, 12:23pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Gee, if you're saying that for some reason, this particular ball was hit in such a way that the runner absolutely could not avoid it without getting off the base ... well, then - he needs to get off the base. But if that's truly the case, then it sounds like a fair ball that was not going to be caught anyway, and he needs to get off the base and run to 2nd.
Perhaps I need a better description of the ball in question, but the point remains that the runner is REQUIRED to avoid getting hit by the ball while it's still fieldable by a fielder. The base doesn't even enter the question. Intent doesn't enter the question. He simply MUST get out of the way. (I fail to see, in any case, why the runner could not have gotten into foul ground and touched the base on it's side, or gotten himself out of the way of the ball in some manner. The base is 4-5 times the width of the ball, after all.) PS - Who's J/R?
|
|
Mon Jun 28, 2004, 01:24pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Try reading OBR 7.08: "A batter is out when (b) He intentionally interferes with a thrown ball; or hinders a fielder attempting to make a play on a batted ball..........If, however, the runner has contact with a legally occupied base when he hinders the fielder, he shall not be called out unless, in the umpire's judgment, such hindrance, whether it occurs on fair or foul territory, is intentional."
What more can I say. G. [Edited by Gee on Jun 28th, 2004 at 02:30 PM]
|
|
Mon Jun 28, 2004, 02:09pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
In the play in question, the runner "interferred" with the BALL. The rule that applies is 7.08(f) Different plays, different rules, different results.
|
|
Mon Jun 28, 2004, 02:09pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Gee,
Reading comprehension skills are a wonderful thing. 7.08 States that "Any RUNNER is out when-- (b)He intentionally interferes with a thrown ball; or HINDERS A FIELDER attempting to make a play on a BATTED BALL. The rule is talking abouta runner hindering a FIELDER on a batted ball. Not about a ball hitting a runner. 7.08 states "Any RUNNER is out when-- (f)He is touched by a fair ball in fair territory before the ball has touched or passed an infielder...." It goes on to note the exception for being touched by an infield fly while standing on base. Quote:
__________________
Well I am certainly wiser than this man. It is only too likely that neither of us has any knowledge to boast of; but he thinks that he knows something which he does not know, whereas I am quite conscious of my ignorance. At any rate it seems that I am wiser than he is to this small extent, that I do not think that I know what I do not know. ~Socrates
|
|
Mon Jun 28, 2004, 02:16pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
I wasn't there but as I understand the situation, the first baseman did have a possible play on the ball but was unsuccessful. The runner had started to step off when the ball was hit but was told by the first base coach to come back because it was a fly ball. There was no intent to interfere.
Seems to me if he had left the base to avoid and the ball had been caught, he was dead meat. Has to be something other than a no win situation.
__________________
MCPO(SW) USN(Ret.) Softball Addict Mississippi Gulf Coast
|
|
Mon Jun 28, 2004, 02:30pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Kaalix stole part of my thunder, in that you are using a completely wrong rule here, and the rule that matters is the one that pertains to being hit by a batted ball.
The other problem is that your rule is OBR, and the situation was Dixie.
|
|
Mon Jun 28, 2004, 03:15pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
The original question was whether staying on a base is a "safe haven" in baseball, as it is in softball, if a runner is hit by the batted ball. The answer is NO, except in the case of IFF as noted by rule.
I would expect that every youth code (LL, Babe Ruth, Dixie, AAU, etc...) follows the OBR ruling 7.08f. I think even FED stays true on this one.
|
|
Mon Jun 28, 2004, 04:06pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Wow, you guys will take any port in the storm to show you are right, Interfered with the ball not the fielder, not OBR, Dixie, yadda, yadda yadda.
When a runner is hit by a batted ball and interference is called is it because he interfered with the ball or interfered with a fielders attempt to field the ball? Come to class. With that I'll A2D.
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
