1st / 3rd basemen straddling the bag in foul territory

[Kaliix]

While I agree that having the search function turned on would be easier, it's not like you can't do a google search of just this site.

[LDUB]

Originally posted by Kaliix
While I agree that having the search function turned on would be easier, it's not like you can't do a google search of just this site.

Google searches don't work well.

[NFump]

Originally posted by Tim C
In your original post you asked the penalty:

If for some reason an umpire starts up with less than the associated number of players in fair territory there can be no play and it is one (of three) do overs in the Official Rules of Baseball.

Example:

For some unknown reason when the defense takes the field F9 does not join them.

With a count of 2 balls and 1 strike (or any other count) the umpire relizes that F9 is not on the field.

Play starts from "scratch" and is a "do over" . . . even if outs are or made or runners successfully required base it is ALL a do over from the start of the inning.

As for straddling the base . . . there must be 100 or more threads on umpires boards across the internet covering the issue.

Could you please cite a source for this ruling? I don't see an advantage gained by the defense by only having 8 players instead of 9.

[Tim C]

It has only been discussed for 100 posts over the years.

Play cannot start until all players are legally in position.

I am amazed that anyone hasn't heard this example over-and-over. It is the play discussed at all professional schools . . . and in all documents.

Do you really not believe the reference?

Baseball rules, unlike other sports, don't necessarily follow advantage/disadvantage philosophies.

It is universially accepted as one of three recognized "Do Overs" in Baseball

(See Balk @ NCAA level on an IBB).

[GarthB]

"Could you please cite a source for this ruling? I don't see an advantage gained by the defense by only having 8 players instead of 9."

You're not thinking very clearly here. Try again, who would gain from the defense only fielding 8 players?

[NFump]

Please cite a source (someplace someone could go and look it up for themselves). That's all I asked for.

From J/R: Eight Fielders on Fair Territory

When any dead ball becomes live, every fielder(other than the catcher) must be completely on fair territory. Other than the pitcher and catcher, a fielder may position himself anywhere on fair territory. No penalty is suggested or mandated for violation of this rule.

This part in red: If any fielder (other than the catcher) is not in fair territory when the ball is put in play by the plate umpire, (c) and a pitch is delivered, the resulting action stands unless the defense gains an advantage attributable to the fielder's illegal positioning. The umpire will make any ruling he feels necessary to nullify the advantage gained by the defense; in doing so he can also allow the offense to accept the play despite some apparent advantage gained. If a pitch is not batted and the catcher throws for a play that in any way involves the fielder in violation of the rule, penalization is applied as in (b) above. ("b" states a balk, ball live unless some runner does not acquire his advance base, whereupon the ball is dead and all runners are awarded one base.)

This is the type of "source" I asked for. And yes, I know this is the author's opinion and it's "unofficial" but it is a source. If you have an "official source" please cite it. Thank you.

[ChapJim]

Originally posted by GarthB
"Could you please cite a source for this ruling? I don't see an advantage gained by the defense by only having 8 players instead of 9."

You're not thinking very clearly here. Try again, who would gain from the defense only fielding 8 players?

Sounds to me like he's thinking very clearly. Why would the rules reward the defense's own stupidity with a "do-over"?

[GarthB]

Originally posted by ChapJim

Sounds to me like he's thinking very clearly. Why would the rules reward the defense's own stupidity with a "do-over"?

Who says they are? B1 is out at first. B2 flies out to F8. Uh-oh...no F9. Start over.

[ChapJim]

Originally posted by Tim C
It has only been discussed for 100 posts over the years.

I am amazed that anyone hasn't heard this example over-and-over. It is the play discussed at all professional schools . . . and in all documents.

It is universially accepted as one of three recognized "Do Overs" in Baseball

Tee --

Why "hide the ball" on much-discussed, universally accepted truths? You could have saved a lot of time (and irritated fewer people) by just providing a reference. That's all he asked for.

[Striker991]

It appears that this J/R reference is in contradiction to your post. Please state the reference that supports your position.

Thanks.

[Tim C]

I guess I will just say "cuz that's the way it is . . ."

I am not going to take any more time to prove anything.

I am not being unsocial or an a$$. I am just saying that the "no right fielder play" has been used for decades in schools and clinics.

That is good enough for me.

I am not changing my position I am simply not in a position to take the time to prove something that may not be printed in black and white.

With Rick Roder's comments (they should be taken very seriously) I am really not sure why we are even where we are in the discussion.

Maybe Carl will speak up, maybe Dave Hensley, or Bob Jenkins -- I am affected in two ways:

1- I may have accepted something as gospel that has never been documented . . .

2- I may be simply passing on another item that would make a "myth" list . . .

We were taught at professional school (all be it, many years ago) that play does not count if that old F9 went to the head and missed the first two batters.

Load up and attack if you want . . . I am not going to even try to document this further.

Maybe it is just "My Bad!"

[bob jenkins]

I don't have the time to look it up now (and I'd start with the BRD which I don't have with me), but I think the philosophy *might* be the same as on a "hiddne ball trick" after a time out. IF F1 doesn't have the ball, it can't be put into play (no matter that the umpire pointed and said "Play"). Similarly (perhaps), if all fielders aren't on the field, the ball can't be put into play to start the inning.

OF course, I know that FED and NCAA have different rules / penalties on being in foul territory, yet the same rule on the "hidden ball trick," so my logic might be suspect.

[NFump]

Bob, that's the whole point of the question. What to do if the ball IS put in play. With the hidden ball trick you're only going to get one play, but with a fielder missing, you could get two or more batters in the inning before it's discovered. I look at it like this ,no harm, no foul. If the defense doesn't gain an advantage from it, i.e. the "missing" fielder comes out of dugout and catches pickoff throw and tags runner, then play on. If the offense fails to "take advantage" of the missing fielder, oh well, you should "hit it where they ain't".

[Matthew F]

'99 BRD

OFF Interp 86-221: Penalty: Deary rules that any play is nullified when a fielder is not in fair territory. (REF, 9/84) Exception: a fielder in foul ground at the time of an appeal is not a reason for canceling the appeal.


And for the record, I didn't know this either until I looked it up.

[Edited by Matthew F on Jun 27th, 2005 at 07:19 PM]

[DG]

Originally posted by NFump
Bob, that's the whole point of the question. What to do if the ball IS put in play. With the hidden ball trick you're only going to get one play, but with a fielder missing, you could get two or more batters in the inning before it's discovered. I look at it like this ,no harm, no foul. If the defense doesn't gain an advantage from it, i.e. the "missing" fielder comes out of dugout and catches pickoff throw and tags runner, then play on. If the offense fails to "take advantage" of the missing fielder, oh well, you should "hit it where they ain't".

I look at it like this, this is a preventable problem, look around and not let play continue if you don't have the required numbers of players.