Authorized person
 

This happened to one of our umpires in a FED game, looking for your comments as to the correct ruling from FED guys:

R2, 0 outs. Ground ball to third. F5 throws to first. R2 starts advancing to third on the throw. Throw goes wide of the F3, and hits an assistant DEFENSIVE coach who was standing outside of the dugout/team bench area by a few feet.

The ball MAY (or may not) have gone into DBT if it had not hit the coach.

Does the ball become dead, or remain alive?

(As an aside: These umpires kept the ball alive. R2 scored and B/R reached second...they agreed that this is where the runners would have gone had the ball gone out of play...but they were wondering if the ball should have been killed and bases awarded.)

Thanks in advance.

I got nothin, except a bench warning following the play, to stay where they belong. Its the same as if the ball hit a base coach, or an umpire. 3-2-3 & 3-3-1a

Play on!
 

As long as the defensive coach did nothing intentional I don't think there is any need to kill the play.

This goes back to the threads on keeping coaches in the dugout.

But, if there is intent by the coach, that's a different play.

Of course, once the play is over, the coach is going to wish he had been in the dugout because I'm going to address the situation with him.

Dont have my book but its in Rule 3 (players coaches in the dugout) and Rule 5 on Dead ball situations.


Thanks
David

Throw accidentally hits a base coach, ball remains alive.. 3-2-3, BUT, this does not apply in this situation.

In this situation, where a defensive assistant is out of the dugout, 3-3-1j penalty restricts that coach to the bench.

If you feel ball would have gone into DBT in absence of coach being there, call DDB, award bases appropriately, and restrict coach to bench for being on the field in a live ball situation.

How does the ball hit someone who doesn't exist? LOL sorry just kidding.

You say this was a defensive coach out of the dugout by a few feet so I assume he is not a base coach permitted to be on the field. I don't think he is afforded same consideration as a base coach who is where he needs to be but struck by a thrown ball. Award bases accordingly, as if ball went into the dugout, and maybe he will stay there more often.

Related question
 

Do you treat the Defensive coach and this sitch as spectator interference?

If so what's the call?

Rob,

I'm going to treat him as "loose equipment". ;) FED 1-3-7, Penalty.

I agree with those who suggest ruling the ball dead and awarding bases if, in the umpire's judgement, the errant throw would have entered DBT had it not hit the base coach.

I believe in FED he is considered bench personnel not authorized to be in LBT. FED 3-3-1a.

JM

Guys, read my post. Penalty for 3-3-1j, restrict to dugout.

Penalty allows for
a) Restriction to bench, then ejection or;
b) Ejection

From FED cut and paste

j . be outside the designated dugout (bench) or bullpen area if not a batter, runner, on-deck batter, in the coach's box or one of the nine players on defense;

For coaches who violate g, h, i, j, k, or l, the umpire may (1) restrict the offender to bench/dugout for the remainder of the game or (2) eject the offender. Any coach restricted to the bench shall be ejected for further misconduct. A coach may leave the bench/dugout to attend to a player who becomes ill or injured.

I think 3-31j penalty is appropriate is this situation. Eject him for being in fair ball territory and interfering with the play. DDB, let the play continues. If you felt his action kept the ball in play, kill it, award the two bases, and eject him. If you don't feel his interference kept the ball from going out of play, you could put him on the bench for the rest of the game. Still, I think I would eject him IMHO.

UMP(coach)JM,

Would you say that if this had been played pursuant to OBR...that this would have been "authorized person" (as defined by J/R) interference...and that it would not have been interference unless the defensive coach intentionally contacted the ball?

lawump,

A slight distinction - I would consider it interference by "an other teammate". He is a "member" of the team and he is, by rule, not authorized to be in LBT while the ball is live in either OBR or FED. I would deem his willfully being out of the dugout as sufficient evidence of "intent" and rule on the play based on my best judgement of what would have happened had he not been in LBT - benefit of the doubt against the offending team. Again, FED or OBR.

JM

There are options
 

But don't forget the whole penalty though which states "unless the offense is judged to be of a minor nature."

Its all about judgement and game management. If you want to call nothing you can, if you want to call an out you can, and if you want to restrict someone to the dugout you can. (and all of this is "by rule")

I've had this happen in games and I'm like Coach JM in that I've often treated it like they are loose equipment which by rule gives you the right to call an out. (if you feel its deserved)

Depends on if I've warned the coach or not etc., :)

Thanks
David