"What if the ball was trickling down the 3rd base line, just in foul territory, and the pitcher throws his glove at the ball and hits it in foul territory? In the umpire's judgment, the ball could have become a fair ball. As the umpire, what's your ruling?"
I should have mentioned initailly that, this is a loaded question!
I'll explain, in good time...

[Edited by Rog on Dec 3rd, 2001 at 06:58 PM]

Does LL "accept" PBUC rulings? If so, award the BR and all runners three bases from the time the ball was touched.

I'd recommend a three base award IF in your judgement the ball could have rolled fair.

For the case of a foul ball specifically, it isn't covered in OBR rules thus you may apply 9.01(c).

Use this rationale: If a fielder deliberately deflects a foul ball that <b>could become fair</b>, it IS a three base award by rule in both High School and College rules. In the absence of an official OBR rule, the same interpretation was adopted and established by the professional rules interpreters. All known precedents establish this award.

<i> Originally posted by Rich Ives </i>

<b> I'd recommend a three base award IF in your judgement the ball could have rolled fair.

For the case of a foul ball specifically, it isn't covered in OBR rules thus you may apply 9.01(c).

Use this rationale: If a fielder deliberately deflects a foul ball that <b>could become fair</b>, it IS a three base award by rule in both High School and College rules. In the absence of an official OBR rule, the same interpretation was adopted and established by the professional rules interpreters. All known precedents establish this award. </b>

Rich glad to see your quoting FED. The applicable FED rule is 8-4-3b. Don't you think it's time for LL to adopt FED?

Pete Booth

I'm having a hard enough time with OBR without having to learn a new book ;-)

Seriously, OBR is what the kids and parents see on TV or at the local minor league park. We have a hard enough time as is without having to explain "Well it's different here" on top of it.

Between OBR and FED, as most youth leagues (not just LL)are OBR based, I'd bet that multiple-times as many games are played under OBR as are under FED. It would seem to the that FED is the oddball here.

The highly visible differences between OBR and LL are MPR, pitching limits, no lead-offs, and slide/avoid.

The first three wouldn't change no matter what the rules base. FED leaves pitching up to the states so there isn't consistency there anyhow.

Slide/avoid vs. the FED slide rule?? Do we care?

Appeals just self corrected, so to speak, except for the weird dead ball appeal bit.

What advantages would you anticipate in a LL conversion to FED?

<i> Originally posted by Rich Ives </i>

<b> What advantages would you anticipate in a LL conversion to FED? </b>

Rich I would recommend conversion starting with the Jr.'s and above. RE: Many of these kids play HS ball anyhow, so there wouldn't be much of a conversion factor unless you play in a state that did not adopt FED rulings, however, NY isn't one of them.

Also, as you know from Eteamz, there has been many a discussion in which there wasn't a specific ruling in OBR but made clearer using FED. ie; the one described in this thread. A prime example would be verbal Interference. As you know the word <b> verbal </b> is absent from the OBR definition and is not recognized in authoritative opinion.

When's the last time you saw someone in MLB called out for verbal interference? However, the FED has both a definition and case book plays covering this very issue.

There are many instances where FED has a specific ruling but OBR is vague.

IMO, what LL really needs is their own case book which defines <b> Their Specific Game </b> When we talk about <i> in the act of making a play </i> it's not feasable to apply the authoritative opinions of the PBUC or J/R and try and equate it to 11 yr. old LJ.

The FED at least trys to bridge the gap between the game played by <b> the Big Boys </b> vs. the game played by most of us.

Pete Booth

How about a state that didn't adopt <b>any</b> FED rules, never mind rulings. There are two of them, you know. And a third state has no high school baseball, so you can throw them into the mix as well.

Professional baseball players know enough not to scream at an infielder who's about to catch a pop up. Verbal interference <b>most certainly</b> fits within the OBR definition. Perhaps you're talking about verbal obstruction, which in my mind is one of the most ridiculous of the FED rules.

Judging from the FED discussions I've seen all over the Internet for the past three years, OBR does not hold the patent on vague and confusing rulings.

While I agree on the casebook idea, I have not had a problem applying the OBR to any level of Little League for the past 21 years. "The act of making a play," is the same thing whether you're 10 years old or 20.

As a high school umpire from a state that has never adopted the FED book, the constructive changes that the FED has employed can easily be adopted to the OBR without having to change code numbers, or overhaul what are common sense rules. We are living proof that you can have your cake and eat it, too. You don't have to have ridiculous balk regulations and a good bat rule. You can have both the time-tested common sensical approach of the OBR, and the few good ideas that FED has implemented, all together in one league!

re: what LL really needs is their own case book!
 

They do - - - it's titled: "The Right Call".
Interestingly enough, rule 7.05 is covered on pages 26,
27 and 28.
Now, on page 27, subsection (c)reads: three bases, if a fielder deliberately throws a glove and touches a fair ball. The ball is in play and batter may advance to home plate at the batters own peril;
Sounds an awful lot like O.B.R. wording to me, with no reference to any specific LL interp/ruling.