Deliberately removing glove

[Daryl H. Long]

Originally posted by Thom Coste

...except that it is a two base award. Here is the 2005 NFHS Baseball Rules Interpretation from the website:

SITUATION 6: B1 hits a slow roller down the first-base line. F1 rushes over to field the ball, but cannot get the ball out of his glove. He quickly removes his glove with the ball still in it, and shovels the glove to the first baseman, who is in contact with the base. The first baseman catches the glove with the ball in it just before B1 touches the base. RULING: When F1 removes his glove with the ball lodged in it and shoveled it to the first baseman, the umpire should declare “Time,” and award all runners, including the batter-runner, two bases. This is a ball that is lodged in a player’s equipment. (2-9-1, 8-3-3c, 5-1-1f-5)

I knew I had read the play somewhere. I printed out the Fed 2005 interpretations way back in March. I went back through previous casebooks and never thought to reread the 2005 interps again.

While the FED interp shows I got the play right I think they need to readdress the rule to include the 'ball stuck in mitt' language that OBR has adopted.

Rereading the rules that were cited to prove the ruling one can readily see that it is a stretch to say the least.

5-1-1f-5 Does anyone on this cite really think this rule includes the mitt? I said earlier the purpose of the mitt is to secure the ball (lodge ball it in). Even interp says that the ball does not dead until the equipment becomes detached. Dead ball immediately.

8-3-3 penalty for detached player equipment is a Delayed dead ball 8-3-4) and is a form of obstruction (see also 5-2-b). All the examples cited by the rule only involve trying to gain posession or trying to prevent the ball from going farther by touchig it with the detatched equip.

I agree with Akelsey on the reason why we kill the play. The rules are written in an effort to balance offense and defense. 2 bases seem to be extreme for the case although it is consistent with the ground rule double.

A one base award to batter and runners (whether forced or not) seems appropriate. That would make it consistent with all other obstruction awards. One base minimum and then additional bases which in umpires judgement would nullify the act.