confusion of batter and advacing runner

[quiggley94]

OBR rules second game of the season 9-10yo level.
im PU my father is BU
one out r2 count 2-0 to batter
next pitch called strike runner starts troting down to first
we call the runner back. count 2-1
next pitch r2 steals 3rd. called ball again batter trots down to first. catcher has ball and is torn between throwing at first and third. throws to first and 3rd base coach then sends r2/3 home taking advantage of the confusion. BU calls dead ball, send runner back to 3 rd returns batter to plate count 3-1
coach demands to know how can an umpire can kill a live ball during play. i and base ump judge travesty of the game since first year we killed play and returned to play instead of an out and ejection. return to play.
next inning
r2 one out 3-2 count catch makes a snatch grab on called third strike, first base coach is yelling "run" at the batter. batter runs to first as i call batter is out r2 advanced to 3rd rounds base. catcher then throws ball to first who catches it and throws it back towards catch who boots it runner scores.
defence coach comes out starts a fit gets stop sign and steams into dougout. fans cry but realtively but stay quiet.

next inning
non steamed coach proves we are fair(i hope) one of his batters repeats the first incident and gets the same result.

would 6.06c be the right rule refernce
and what is the "travasty rule" reference


[Edited by quiggley94 on Apr 27th, 2005 at 12:06 PM]

[largeone59]

quig, you really need to edit your post and throw some punctuation in there to make the situation more clear (i wouldn't go to the lengths of what Bob said, but please re-write it).

But, based on what i can sort of pick out of the post:

Sounds like you guys shouldn't have killed the play. The catcher should have known the count and made the play on R2. Even if the BR was walked, why he would even think of throwing down to first, i have no idea. If the batter's actions were purely unintentional (plus it being 9-10 yr olds, so i'd imagine it is), you should have done nothing.



Your second play..... i dont see what went wrong there, or why the defensive coach would be throwing a fit.... if it is b/c of the batter running to first when he is out, by this act alone, he can't be charged with interference. that play sounds legal to me.

[mcrowder]

I agree - buy some punctuation, this post is very hard to decipher.

But from what I gather, you guys had no reason to kill this play. "Travesty" is a pretty strong word - and a 9 year old running to first on ball 3 is certainly not a travesty.

[quiggley94]

travesty referance is the rule put into place to prevent players from playing the game in such a way as to mock or riducule the rules of the game. it was originaly add due to a player who would steal second then steal first so he could steal second again.

in referance to 6.06c: it talks about a batter leaving his box to cause interfeence in a play, though in this case we belived not as much the batter but the coach taking advatage of his batter to slip a "fast one" over on the other team by observing what was happening and taking advantage of it.
this is what im refering to since this is a particapation leauge and considered a teaching leauge for players and coaches(i.e.: several warnings on balks, explanationof whats done wrong, help in appealing the right way.) does that clear up our thoughts or should we have simply let it slide.

[largeone59]

quig, check 7.09 (f) - last paragraph