<b>PLAY</b>: Bases loaded, no outs. Runners are off with the pitch. B1 takes a mighty swing, but only squibs a nubber down the third base line. F2, R3, and the ball are all converging on about the same spot. The ball bites and takes a backspin, rolls through F2's legs without touching him, and strikes R3 in the foot in fair territory immediately behind F2. R3 scores and all runners, including B1, reach their advance bases safely.

What's the call in OBR? How about FED and NCAA?

My Guess
 

OK, I will give it a shot. Using 7.09m I would rule all runners safe since there is no reference about another fielder having a chance to make a play on the ball. Of course if it was obivious I doubt it would make Interp of the Week, so I anticipate a twist that I am overlooking.

Unless the runner kicks the ball intentionally, it is live and in play once it goes by the fielder (who had an opportunity to field the ball - too bad it went through his legs, even if if WAS going backwards!). The catcher, by definition, is a fielder. No interference.

I agree with MIke and JJ -- play stands.

Guys:

It's a famous play, and the ruling is NOT the same at all levels. That's all I'll say, but it ought to get you guys thinking.

Would any play that <b>seems</b> so simple BE so simple?

OBR.

Play stands.

Now, we have a ball which hits a runner. The question is did an infielder attempt to play it?

The catcher had a shot, but missed. No other fielder had a shot. Why penalize R3?

Some may question whether the catcher is an infielder in this situation. Well he has to be. I would even rule the same if the pitcher had come down the line and the ball came back through the pitcher.

Blaine

R3 be out for interference. Ball dead. Runners return unless forced by B/R. B/R is awarded first. Unless if in the JUDGMENT of the umpire R3 broke up a double. thyen you ring up the B/R also. In Fed it would be R2

rex

Rex:

OBR Only (I don't do FED or NCAA).

WHY is this interference?

How is this interfence?

What reference are you using?

Blaine

Gonna take a shot here and say that there's 3 different rulings. I'm basing this off of play 287 from the BRD:

OBR -- dead ball, R3 out. (7.08f)
FED -- dead ball, R3 and R2 ruled out (prevented a possible double play) (5-1-1f, 8-4-2k)
NCAA -- live ball (8-5k)

OBR can only have a DP if R3's actions were with intent to break up the DP. FED can have the DP if the interference prevented a DP, even without intent. NCAA requires the fielder to have a reasonable chance to field the ball.

Just a guess,
Dennis

Damn!!!!

rex

Stupid Ruling
 

OK, I have checked the BRD and see as I noted in my earlier post that the catcher is not considered an infielder.

Normally, I have no problem with interps etc. However, this is one of the stupidist I have seen.

Basically, the catcher screws the pooch and the runner pays the price. In this "classic" play R3 is past the catcher clear to the plate when the backspin goes through the catcher and hits R3 who could be one step from scoring. We can even take it further. Let's say on the intital play, R3 went to the inside of the diamond to avoid the catcher. NOW, the runner, who has gone to the inside to avoid the fielder, is penalized. So the runner has done absolutely everything he could and is screwed.

Absolutely crazy. I might, no I would, go out on a limb in a game and not call this interference. Why, common sense only. NO, technically I don't have backing in the rules, but COMMON sense (which has nothing to do with OBR) would rule in my world on this one.

Let's take a look at the catcher's status. ON an infield fly 5 feet in front of the plate, pitcher calls for it, catcher calls him off. The catcher misses the ball and it falls untouched and remains fair. WE have an infield fly, as it should (could) have been caught by an infielder. Who was about to catch it - the catcher. IN this situation and overthrows, the catcher is an infielder. OBR rules SUCK. I wish they would get their sh** together.

My point is the definition of an infielder for this play is stupid and the bigwigs at the PUBC need to get this one right.

OK, I am prepared for the onslaught.

Blaine

Carl --

Do you have some support other than the literal reading of 2.00 Infielder that supports the BRD's claim that the catcher is not an infielder for this play?

We already have the IFR example of how that definition is flawed -- couldn't this be another example? It sure seems to me like the intent of the rule (runners should give the fielders an unhindered chance to field the ball) was satisfied.

(And, yes, I recognize that I'm asking you for support when I have none. If it's just a difference in our reading of the book, I can live with that. If there's something I am missing, I'd just like to know.)

Thanks.

Back Pocket
 

Since my BRD does not fit in my back pocket, I am pretty sure I could convince a coach that my application of the rule is correct.

Ta da.....
 

It's - "Palm Pilot" to the rescue.
Can't wait for the CR Rom version.....

<i> Originally posted by Jim Porter </i>
<b> PLAY: Bases loaded, no outs. Runners are off with the pitch. B1 takes a mighty swing, but only squibs a nubber down the third base line. F2, R3, and the ball are all converging on about the same spot. The ball bites and takes a backspin, rolls through F2's legs without touching him, and strikes R3 in the foot in fair territory immediately behind F2. R3 scores and all runners, including B1, reach their advance bases safely.

What's the call in OBR? How about FED and NCAA? </b>

I'll read my FED Case/ Rule Book tonight and the BRD to see if I can find a similiar play, but for now here's my OBR ruling:

6.05 A batter is out when
(g) His fair ball touches him before touching a fielder;

My Call: The ball is dead, B1 is out and all runners return. His Fair Ball did not touch anyone, therefore, if we go by the strict wording of the rule, B1 is out.

I have Papa C's BRD and also the NAPBL, so I will do further research tonight and see if there's an opinion on a similar type play, but for now I'll go with the wording of 6.05(g).

Pete Booth