Runner on second advancing to third is hit by the batted ball. The runner is behind the third baseman, who misses ball entirely. Shortstop cannot make a play on the ball.

I say that play continues. Am I right?

Thanks.

If the ball has passed the fielders other than the pitcher, and noone has a legitimate shot at making a play,then the runner should be fine. But if it hits him before the fielder has a chance to play the ball, Dead Ball, Runner is out and all runners return to the base occupied at the time of the pitch, unless forced to advance by a preceding runner.

B,
Yeah. Let it continue.
What a jump the runner got!!!!
mick

Sounds like a live ball to me. Good call.

###############

Depends.

If the third baseman had a reasonable chance to make the play. By that I mean, did the ball pass him by 3 to 5 feet on either side of him or less. If it did the runner is not out.

However, if the ball passed the infielders by more than five feet, i.e. not a reasonable chance to make the play, and it hits the runner behind them, then the runner is dead out. You must give the defense a REASONABLE chance to field the ball. If you haven't, your meat. G.

[Edited by Gee on May 25th, 2001 at 09:45 AM]

Depends Part 2
 

There was a similar thread on URC. The discussion went like this: Runner is out when hit fair ball except when the ball passes near a fielder (7.08f). The posters claim that in this situation: R2, R3 with infielders in, a grounder in the hole that passes equidisant between the fielder that hits R2 would result in R2 being called out. Apparently, the offensive player has an obligation to get out of the way of batted ball expect when the ball passes close enough to a fielder that a runner does not have a chance to get out of the way. Seems to make sense though I know I would have a hard time convincing an offensive coach since 7.08f does not define passed as meaning within a few feet of the fielder.

Re: Depends Part 2
 

#############
Mike,

Actually 7.08(f) does not mention the word NEAR, it just says "...Passes a fielder...". That is where the problem is. It should say "After that fielder has had a reasonable chance to field the ball"

JEA interprets Reasonable chance as three feet,i.e., arms length, Carl Childress interprets it as 5 feet,i.e., a step and arms length, J/R doesn't mention it although in his list of troubled rules he lists 7.08(f) twice, once as Disorganized and again as Inaccurate.

There are only two times a runner can get hit by a fair batted ball and not be out. 1. If the ball is deflected by a fielder, including the pitcher, before hitting the runner. and 2. If it has passed a fiedler after he has a reasonable chance to make the play (3 to 5 ft.) and then only if there is no another fielder directly behind the first fielder and the second fielder could have made the play.

On the URC thread you cited, I posted an extreme situation to drive home the point. I'll include it here.

Ted Williams at bat, Bobby Doerr is at second. Defense puts on the shift. They take all fielders, with the exception of the left fielder, from the left side of the field and put them on the right side.

Williams inside outs the pitch to the left side, it hits Doerr. What do you have?

Doerr is dead out as he limps off the field. So the Mgr comes out and says, Hey blue, There was no fielder there, how could he interfer. Answer, Doerr interfered with the normal course of play and didn't give the defense a reasonable chance to make a play on it before it hit him, that's interference. Can't do that. I've got that ball protected all the way to the outfield wall.

The rule says that a runner is out when he gets hit by a fair batted ball. It goes on to list the exceptions I cited above. If it wasn't one of those exceptions the runner is out.

A lot of umpires confuse this sitch with the, interfering with a fielder while making a play sitch. Whole different ball game. And the way the rule is written in the OBR doesn't help at all either. G.



[Edited by Gee on May 25th, 2001 at 12:14 PM]

Now I am confused. What I have read implies that if the infielders do not have a reasonable chance to catch the ball, for example a ball hit in the hole, and it hits the runner, then the runner is out, because the first player to have a reasonable chance at the ball is the outfielder.

It seems to contradict the Rules 5.1.f1, 5.1.f2 and 8.4.2k.

In particular 8.4.2k states that "The runner is out when contacted by a fair ball before it touches an infielder, or after it passes any infielder, except the pitcher and the umpire is convinced that another infielder has a play".

I would stand by my call of letting play continue, even though the ball passed more than 5 feet from the 3rd baseman and shortstop.

################

BP,

I do not do FED rules, just OBR. Your quote of FED Rule 8.4.2k appears to be the same as the OBR. If you were doing an OBR game, your call would be wrong. Not knowing the FED interp, or case book examples on that, I can't comment. However, I think it is the same as the OBR. G.

G,

Thanks for the reply. Can you explain to me why I am wrong? I agree that no infielder had a reasonable chance on the ball. I am basing my argument on 8.4.2k that states no other infielder has a chance at the ball.

Would it not be the same as an umpire being hit on the line after it passes the infielders, regardless of a reasonable chance?

Please let me know what you think.

Thanks.

<i> Originally posted by BPorter </i>


<b> Thanks for the reply. Can you explain to me why I am wrong? I agree that no infielder had a reasonable chance on the ball. I am basing my argument on 8.4.2k that states no other infielder has a chance at the ball. </b>

Under FED rules, the runner is not out. FED makes no mention of the 3-5 ft. from fielder that J/R uses.

FED Case Book Play 8.4.2 Sitch H

R1 is advancing to second when the ball batted by B2 (a) is dropped by F4 and is deflected toward R1 or (b) passes several feet to the left of F4 who is playing in front of the baseline. In either case, the ball then touches R1.

<b> Ruling </b> In (a) the touching is ignored because the ball touched a defensive player first. In (b), touching is ignored unless R1 purposely allows the ball to touch him, or in the opinion of the umpire, another player who was in an infielder's position when the pitch was made had a play on the ball.

Therefore, in FED, if in the judgement of the umpire no other player had a chance on the ball, the touching is ignored. IMO FED is much simpler and makes way more sense than the OBR interpretation.

Using the example GEE gave on the ultimate of ultimate shifts using OBR - you are granting the defense a "freebie" and an out which they did not earn. under FED rules - we play on.

Pete Booth

########################333
OK, BP.

I realize it is a tough thing to change your thinking on but the right call is OUT.

Here is where your problem is. The FED rule says:

"The runner is out when contacted by a fair ball before it touches an infielder, or after it PASSESany infielder, except the pitcher and the umpire is convinced that another infielder has a play".

The runner is out "AFTER IT HAS PASSED AN INFIELDER"

In your play the ball "HASN'T PASSED A FIELDER". According to Jim Evans and other acknowledged authoritative opinion. The ball must go by an infielder by less that 5 feet in order to have PASSED him. That did not happen in your play.

The ball went by the infielder by more than five feet as you stated. Therefore, the defense did not have a REASONABLE CHANCE to field the ball before it hit the runner. The runner is out for INTERFERED.

It will take time for this to sink in, work on it. G.

<i> Originally posted by Gee [/i]
<b> Here is where your problem is. The FED rule says:

"The runner is out when contacted by a fair ball before it touches an infielder, or after it PASSESany infielder, except the pitcher and the umpire is convinced that another infielder has a play".

The runner is out "AFTER IT HAS PASSED AN INFIELDER"

In your play the ball "HASN'T PASSED A FIELDER". According to Jim Evans and other acknowledged authoritative opinion. The ball must go by an infielder by less that 5 feet in order to have PASSED him. That did not happen in your play.
</b>

Gee here's the original play

<b> Runner on second advancing to third is hit by the batted ball. The runner is behind the third baseman, who misses ball entirely. Shortstop cannot make a play on the ball. </b>

This is similar to FED Case book play 8.4.2 Sitch:H which I explained above. Under FED rules, the runner is not out. Also, FED doesn't use the interpretations of J/R / Evans etc. That's why they have their own case book.

You are correct using OBR rules, but not under FED which is what BPorter is asking.

Pete Booth

##################

Peter your talking about 8.4.2h, I think we are talking about 8.4.2k but don't know FED. Anyway your play in 8.4.2h is on a DEFLECTED ball and it is the same ruling in OBR. We were talking about an untouched ball that "PASSED" the fielder. Got a game to do. Later. G.

G,

OK. Your argument hinges around what constitutes "reasonable chance", the 3 - 5 feet rule. If that is stated in the rule book then I would have to call the runner out. Is it stated in the rule book? If so, where?

By the letter of the rule (8-4-2k), however, I would still argue that play continues, because in my opinion, no infielder had a play on the ball and the contact was unintentional.

Not going to let you off that easy :-)

Bob

If We Can't Agree
 

When I saw this post yesterday, I cringed. Then after reading the URC posts, I tried to point the alternative interp that Gee had posted. But as you can see, unless you have reference guide of interps, you will be hard pressed to sell your out call to the offense. My guess, you have a protest and some explaining to do. Sometimes the path of least resistance would be best, keep the ball live and hope the defensive coach has not read this threads.

It's not stated in the rule book. It's an interpretation of the word "passed". The interpretation only applies to OBR (pro rules). That's not your situation.

Quote:

By the letter of the rule (8-4-2k), however, I would still argue that play continues, because in my opinion, no infielder had a play on the ball and the contact was unintentional.

Since you were playing under FED rules, your interpretation would be correct.

That's what Gee and Pete have been trying to tell you. The first rulings given were assuming OBR. When you questioned the ruling, you quoted FED. That makes all the difference. This is just one of the 400 or so differences between the codes (and one you won't find, iirc, in the current edition of BRD).

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bob jenkins
[B]"

BJ, What is "IIRC" in your above statement? G.

I don't know what BJ meant by his above statement. However after reading the URC thread, Runner hit by batted ball, again, in order to clarify the FED ruling I conclude that the ruling in FED is the same as the ruling in OBR.

Carl, in that thread, states that fact and Bob Jenkins participated in the thread. Peter Booths ruling was on a deflected ball and matches the OBR.

I just can't fathom the idea that on the Ted Williams shift play, cited above, the runner would NOT be out. Holy Toledo. See ya. G.

1) The FED rule (interpretation) and the OBR rule (interpretation) on a batted, not deflected ball are different.

2) The FED rule and the OBR rule on a batted, deflected ball are the same.

3) Yes, I participated in the thread. At the end of it, I finally convinced Carl that it was a difference.

4) AFAIK, you don't work FED, so please don't try to sell me on your ideas of FED interpretations.

5) "IIRC" means "if I recall correctly"

I think Gee is way over complicating this. The original situation says the runner is behind the F5. If he is behind then he has to be within a three to five area of protection. I still say live ball.

Michael,

If you follow the thread, I clarified that the runner was between F5 and F6. The runner was behind F5 in the sense that he did not run in front of F5 and F5 could have made a play on the ball.

Does this change your position on the call?

Bob

It changes it to a "you have to see it". It's possible it could be an out but it's a case by case basis. If you didn't see an out then the ball is in play.

######################

Let's clear up #4 first. I said at least twice in this thread that I do not know, or do, FED. This thread did not mention FED when it started. I picked it up later, when someone cited FED rules. I am in no way trying to sell you anything on FED rules, I know better than that.

Let's go to #3. You convinced Carl on a different ruling than we are discussing here.

You convinced him that the FED ruling is the same as the Brinkman ruling. The Brinkman ruling simply stated that WHEN THEIR IS A "PULLED IN INFIELD" any ball that hit's a runner after gong by a fielder, (No regard to distance) that runner is NOT out.

When Carl first posted that ruling I and others questioned it. Carl went to Fitzpatrick at PBUC and Fitzpatrick killed it. All that tells me is that the Brinkman ruling is still valid in FED.

No problem but it does not concern this thread. We are not talking here about a pulled in infield, that has been settled.

We are talking here about an infield playing at normal depth. Apparently Fed doesn't accept the common OBR interp by JEA and others. Do they do that by just being silent or is their a definitive case study on it?

Please remember, I got into this as an OBR sitch discussing OBR rules, then it switched to FED leaving me in the wind.
I am just astounded by the fact that their is such a difference in the application of this rule without any definitive case study by the FED and I am involved for no other reason. G.

Can you please point me to the discussion on URC (forum, thread title, date)? I'll be better able to respond when I see that thread.

Thanks.

I've seen MLB plays where a ball hit in the hole between F3 and F4 hits the runner. The ball is past F3 and F4 is pretty far away from the play. I've never seen it not called an out. Maybe because major leaguers can turn impossible plays into outs? Maybe because the rule is pretty simple?

First, Bob, You can go to URC, message board, to Situations, to the thread, Runner hit by a batted ball. 5/7 to 5/10.

Second, Joe, you are right in fact if you called the runner out every time he got hit by a fair batted ball you would be right 99% of the time in OBR. From what they are saying you would be wrong a hell of a lot more in FED and I'm simply trying to find out why.
G

G,

How do I get to the URC forum?

Also, there appears to be at least two governing bodies, FED and OBR. What is the difference between the two?

Thanks.

Bob

Go to http://www.umpire.org and follow what I told Bob.

The OBR are The Official Baseball Rules,published by the Sporting News etc. They are the basis for all baseball rules. FED is the governing body for high school sports and they have adopted their own rules but they are based on the OBR also. 48 States adhere to the FED rules for High School. Two States do not. One is my state, Mass. and the other is Rhode Island. G

Thanks. Here's the relevant play from FED:

8.4.2i Play: With R2 on second, BR hits toward second. The batted ball hits R2 while he is standing on second or while he is on his way to third. F4 and F6 (a) are playing deep behind the baseline or (b) F6 is playing in front of the baseline.


Now, I think this is substantially similar to the play that started this thread. Sure, it uses F6 instead of F5. And, the infield is in and the "normal" instead of the infield "normal" and the runner "back." Those differences shouldn't matter.

I think you'd agree that, under OBR, the runner is out in both cases (assuming the ball didn't pass "through" F6 -- which seems like a safe assumption in the case where R2 in on second).

So, here's the FED ruling:

Ruling:In (a), the ball is dead immediately. R2 is out and BR is awarded first base. In (b), the touching is ignored unless it is ruled intentional, and the ball remains alive because no other fielder had a chance to make a play on the batted ball. (5-1-if)

Note that in (a), the ruling is the same as in OBR -- the ball hadn't "passed" F6 under any definition. It's only under case (b) where there's a difference.

Basically, the OBR interp is that the ball must pass "through" a fielder before the runner is "protected" (some exceptions).

THe FED uses the "string" theory -- use a string to attach F3 to F4 to F6 to F5. If the ball passes the string, the runner is protected.

NCAA uses a rule similar to FED. Sorry, I don't have the exact referecne here.

#################

OK, there have been a lot of points made by you and others about this ruling in OBR vs FED.

The first one was Peter's on the deflected ball. Same as OBR so that's a wash.

The second was Play B above with the infielder IN. That is the Brinkman ruling which, according to Carl, was accepted as authoritative opinion by the OBR. As I have said, that ruling is no longer accepted. However FED does accept it. So when you have a DRAWN IN INFIELDER in FED ball the "PASSING" is ignored. Fine.

Now we go to an infield that is playing at NORMAL DEPTH and the runner is hit by a NON DEFLECTED ball. The fair batted ball has passed an infielder and no other infielder has a reasonable play on the ball. That is what this whole discussion is about, right. OK

Now the ball hits a runner. What's the call? In OBR the ump has to decide if the fielder has had a reasonable chance (5 feet) to make the play. If he has, the runner is safe. If he hasn't, the runner is out. Simple, right.

Now we go to FED. Same play, What's the call? No consideration is given to "reasonable chance" just bang him out. Now you mention the "string" theory. If that is written into the FED ruling I'll buy it, definitive, end of discussion.

Now the question is, is that written into the FED ruling or is it just a theory, used by you and others, to justify this call? After all, you need something to justify it and from what I've read there is nothing else.

OMT (That means, One More Thing) I am not saying your wrong, as I have no reference to the FED rules. I'm just asking why there is such a big difference in the two rulings. It appears to me that this is ruling by default. G.

There is no difference in the rulings whether the infield is drawn in or at normal depth. In OBR, it only matters whether a fielder had a play. In FED and NCAA, it only matters whether the ball went father from the plate than the fielder.

It's not the only difference between FED and OBR, and it's not the most "egregious".

I thought if the runner is hit by a ball which a fielder has a reasonable chance to make a play, the runner is OUT, not "safe". ???

---------------------
I'll buy that statement, now we're on the same page. Good discussion. Tks. G.

----------------------

JJ, I recommend that you read the entire thread. G.