runner struck by thrown ball

[NIump50]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

How do you expect a runner who is trying to reach the base safely, and is within 6 to 10 feet from the base to "veer off" or slide? If he slides, he comes up short. What if the pivot man drops the ball, and the runner slid in anticipation of the throw and ends up 3 feet short of the base?

Not trying to pick on you Steve, but I have another question.
How far from the base does a proper feet first slide start for a 6' player?
How about a head first slide?
On a head first slide, how far out is the runner when he begins to lower the torso in anticipation of the dive forward?
I'll bet you a cold one it's much further than 6' and a little bit further than 10'.
If you're 6' tall and you start your dive 6' away from base, you'll be past the base before you land.
you may be dead on in your rules interp, though I disagree, but this defense does not ring true.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by NIump50

Not trying to pick on you Steve, but I have another question.
How far from the base does a proper feet first slide start for a 6' player?
How about a head first slide?
On a head first slide, how far out is the runner when he begins to lower the torso in anticipation of the dive forward?
I'll bet you a cold one it's much further than 6' and a little bit further than 10'.
If you're 6' tall and you start your dive 6' away from base, you'll be past the base before you land.
you may be dead on in your rules interp, though I disagree, but this defense does not ring true.

I'd say 10 ft. is about right, but I would still have to see the play before calling interference. I'm not going to just willy-nilly give a blanket interference call with just the fact that R1 got nailed with the throw.

I was originally in the camp that called it interference, but as I said, I have had a change in position, ala John Kerry. I voted for the interference, before I voted against it. Pretty spooky, huh?

If your not picking on me, how about arguing with some of the other folks who have taken this position, huh?

[NIump50]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I was originally in the camp that called it interference, but as I said, I have had a change in position, ala John Kerry. I voted for the interference, before I voted against it. Pretty spooky, huh?

If your not picking on me, how about arguing with some of the other folks who have taken this position, huh?

If you were really John Kerry like then I'd be more tempted to impune, discredit and make fun you of as opposed to argue with.

I consider it more of a debate than an argument and your post gave me the best opportunity to present my perspective of FPSR being for the benefit of both the runner and fielder.
If FPSR is for both then IMO the perspective of how it is interpreted changes.
Based on my opinion of the intent of FPSR the responsibility falls on the runner to avoid the relay in a DP situation. If a fielder throws at a runner, trying to draw an interference, then I've got unsportsmanlike conduct.
For me it's a safety rule and I'm going to interpret for the safety of both.