The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #34 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 06, 2008, 09:23pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Wa.
Posts: 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Tyler
I emailed our state rules interpreter and this is the answer I got. Sounds about right since the force was removed.


Would like your input on this particular play. None out and bases loaded. Batter hits a ground ball to F4, but is obstructed with by the catcher. On the play, runner from first maliciously contacts F4. What do we as umpires do?

1. Do we eject the runner from 1B, send runners back to 2B & 3B, and leave batter on 1B?

2. Eject runner from 1B, enforce FPSR, and return runners to 2B & 3B?

3. Move runners up one base, eject runner from 1B, and leave batter on 1B?



You would do no. 1. The batter-runner is awarded 1st and R3 the runner on 1st is out and ejected. Because he is out the other runners are not forced to move up due to the BR being awarded 1st.

Says you. Prove it.

In this thread, I've already cited 8.3.2H, which deals with a different scenario containing both obstruction and interference. That case states:

Quote:
Originally Posted by casebook
The umpire shall deal with obstruction and then interference, since this is the order in which the infractions occurred.

I'm still out there sawing. Now, I don't know FED, so if's there's something in there specific to MC "changing everything", I'm sticking to the rule book, obr that is. I don't know what your quote (above) from the case book is all about, so would need to read the whole case, to be swayed.

As far as the State Inter., well, he no doubt has his thoughts on this, just like many others here on this topic. But til I see something more, I'm stuck, on my limb..

I say the CI enforcement is enforced after the play "unless" (we all know that)...
All runners "including the BR did not reach there advance bases on the play.
The CI penalty is : advance all runners, to correct the catcher interfering with my # 4 hitter, not being allowed to smoke one to the RF gap for a 3 bagger.
IMO there is no possible way to award the D with an out. Unless, the O wants too. This is catchers interference man, what's the deterent to not just grab the big guys bat everytime he comes up with the bases juiced?

I gotta think it's not the O's fault, This play would not have happened W/O the CI, it's our job to make it so.
__________________
SLAS
Reply With Quote
 

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Train Wreck, Malicious Contact, or Obstruction. Rattlehead Softball 22 Mon Jun 11, 2007 04:05pm
Almost Malicious contact ? Chess Ref Softball 26 Mon Mar 12, 2007 02:09pm
Obstruction / Malicious Contact mcrowder Softball 32 Fri May 21, 2004 02:22pm
Malicious Contact Gre144 Baseball 1 Wed Jul 04, 2001 11:42am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:34pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1