FED Play of the Day

[tjones1]

I would use the following from the NFHS website:

SITUATION 19: R1 is on first base with no outs. B2 smashes a one-hopper to F6, who flips the ball to F4 to quickly retire R1. F4 then relays the ball to first in an attempt for a double play, but the ball strikes R1, who is in the baseline and less than halfway to second. The ball ricochets into short right field and B2 reaches first safely. RULING: The play stands. This is not a violation of the force-play slide rule by R1. Unless R1 intentionally made a move to interfere with the thrown ball, the ball stays live and in play. (8-4-2b, 8-4-2g)

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by tjones1

I would use the following from the NFHS website:

SITUATION 19: R1 is on first base with no outs. B2 smashes a one-hopper to F6, who flips the ball to F4 to quickly retire R1. F4 then relays the ball to first in an attempt for a double play, but the ball strikes R1, who is in the baseline and less than halfway to second. The ball ricochets into short right field and B2 reaches first safely. RULING: The play stands. This is not a violation of the force-play slide rule by R1. Unless R1 intentionally made a move to interfere with the thrown ball, the ball stays live and in play. (8-4-2b, 8-4-2g)

Wow, the FED is again contradicting itself. 8-4-2b is about the FPSR, which is not even argued in the above play. Nobody said it was a violation of the FPSR, so why are they mentioning it. 8-4-2g is not applicable either, since it declares that runner out, not the batter-runner. In our plays, R1 is already out, so the rule that applies here is 8-4-1h. "The batter-runner is out when any runner or retired runner interferes (2-21-1, 2-30-3) in a way which obviously hinders an obvious double play."

Either the Casebook ruling above is wrong, or Rule 8-4-1h is wrong.

Shickenbottom, notice that the rule does not say an "obvious attempt" by the runner, it just says that he obviously hinders. It does not say that the runner has to actually try to hinder, just that he obviously has hindered.

[Tim C]

Thank you Tom . . . a written FED response that I had missed.

Ain't the internet great.

(Especially with the opportunity to place people on your ignore list).

Regards,

[DG]

Originally Posted by tjones1

I would use the following from the NFHS website:

SITUATION 19: R1 is on first base with no outs. B2 smashes a one-hopper to F6, who flips the ball to F4 to quickly retire R1. F4 then relays the ball to first in an attempt for a double play, but the ball strikes R1, who is in the baseline and less than halfway to second. The ball ricochets into short right field and B2 reaches first safely. RULING: The play stands. This is not a violation of the force-play slide rule by R1. Unless R1 intentionally made a move to interfere with the thrown ball, the ball stays live and in play. (8-4-2b, 8-4-2g)

Slow runner if the ball hits him less than halfway to 2b on the other end of a 6-4-3. Oh well. This does seem to resolve the question.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by tjones1

I would use the following from the NFHS website:

SITUATION 19: R1 is on first base with no outs. B2 smashes a one-hopper to F6, who flips the ball to F4 to quickly retire R1. F4 then relays the ball to first in an attempt for a double play, but the ball strikes R1, who is in the baseline and less than halfway to second. The ball ricochets into short right field and B2 reaches first safely. RULING: The play stands. This is not a violation of the force-play slide rule by R1. Unless R1 intentionally made a move to interfere with the thrown ball, the ball stays live and in play. (8-4-2b, 8-4-2g)

D***. That's what I was going to say.

OTOH, there's a similar play / interp from a few years ago (that I don't have with me) that has R1 out. IIRC, R1 is closer to second base in this "older" interp.

And, while the words "veer off" are (apparently -- I didn't search) not in the book, the phrase "slide or run in a direction away from a fielder" is in the book (in, at least, the 2006 POE)

[Armadillo_Blue]

Well, I will jump into this one as my first attempt to post on this site.

I am a Central Illinois guy and have spent the last few weeks reading through posts on this forum to get a feel for things.

I got my copy of the BRD a few days ago and think that something I read has some application here.

Section 274 talks about Fed 8.3.3f and states that a runner is not guilty of interference if he continues to advance even if he knows he is out, even if that advance allows other runners to make additional bases.

In this scenario the runner is, in my opinion, too far away from second to fall under the FPSR. To me this rule says he does not need to veer off. He can continue to run the base path in a straight line despite being out.

From other discussions on this forum I've learned that it is interference with a thrown ball only if it is intentional.

Therefore my vote in this scenario is that I have nothing. The runner did not interfere intentionally and was within his right to continue to run in a straight line toward second base.

Hopefully I'm not too far off base with my first shot at a rules debate here.

Thanks guys,

Kyle