NFHS interpretation

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by David Emerling
Is it just me, or are some of the rule references that support many example plays tenuous, at best?

You read the play ... you read the ruling ... then look up the cited reference and find NO BASIS for the suggested ruling based on the reading of the rule. I see this happen time and time again.

Here's an interpretation that I just read from the NFHS website:

SITUATION 10: With 1 out and R1 on first and a count of 2-1, B2 hits a bouncing ball along the first base foul line. U1 mistakenly declares “Foul!” as F1 picks up the ball in fair territory. RULING: The ball is dead immediately. R1 returns to first. B2 continues at bat with a count of 2-2. (5-1-1h)

Seems reasonable enough.

The ball instantly becoming dead seems reasonable and is supported by the cited rule.

David: I have an even stranger play, one given by Kyle McNeeley of the NFHS rules committee at the TASO state meeting.

B1 pops up in foul territory behind first base. The umpire calls "Foul ball." F3 catches the pop-up. And the answer is:

It's just a dead ball, and the batter stays at bat!