FED - Force Play Slide Rule

[David B]

Originally Posted by David Emerling

I would like to get some opinions on something that has become a hot topic in my area recently.

Is a forced runner in violation of the FPSR when he a) slides past the bag, or b) slides off to the side away from the fielder when, in both cases he makes no contact with the fielder nor hinders/complicates the play in any manner? Should an automatic out be called on the BR in such cases?

Thanks!

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Just curious what is the reason for the "hot topic". Are some assuming that it is an illegal slide thus you have to call the DP?

Just wondering what might be causing the confusion.

The same could also be said for the runner who simply runs through the bag, as long as there is no interference of any kind with the play, simply play on.

Thanks
David

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by David B

Just curious what is the reason for the "hot topic". Are some assuming that it is an illegal slide thus you have to call the DP?

Just wondering what might be causing the confusion.

The same could also be said for the runner who simply runs through the bag, as long as there is no interference of any kind with the play, simply play on.

Thanks
David

Apparently there has been an epidemic of automatic double plays being called and some of the coaches have called the assignor and complained, claiming the umpires are handing them out like candy.

This prompted an email discussion within our organization where it became apparent that a large segment of the umpiring group felt that if a forced runner did anything other than slide straight into the bag and stop, that an automatic double play must be called. Oddly, this group seemed to be the majority. This needed to be corrected but they were insistent that they were interpreting it correctly.

I have a copy of the 2006 BRD and play 171-320 is not only a stark example of the interpretation of the rule - but, in my opinion, it goes a bit overboard.

Play 171-320: FED only. Bases loaded: B1 grounds to F4, who fields the ball and throws to F6 to start the double play. F6 catches the throw and forces out R1 as F6 crosses the bag to the right field side. F6 now throws to first as retired R1 begins his slide into second. Retired R1's slide is clearly to the right side of the bag (the side F6 is now on). R1 is sliding towards F6, but he misses the shortstop by a foot or two as F6 keeps moving after the throw. F6's throw is in time to retire BR at 1B; meanwhile, R3 scores. Ruling: Even though it is obvious the runner is illegally sliding toward the fielder, it is not interference. The ball remains alive: two out, R3 in, R2 on third.

As you'll notice, F6 ends up retiring the BR with his throw.

Let's change just one thing in the above case play and tell me if this might make the non-interference call much more difficult to make.

F6 air mails the ball over F3's head and BR advances to 2nd on the wild throw.

Try to sell that non-interference call. Good luck.

The umpire would have to say that the wild throw and the runner's attempt to take out the pivot man were not related. It was just a bad throw having absolutely nothing to do with the runner sliding into 2nd. Although I can see that being a possibility - I don't think I would want to go there.

Make the above call and I guarantee you'll end up having to eject the defensive manager.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

[jicecone]

BRD 2008 Section 328 pg 216 [Authoratative opinion 43-328] basically states that if an illegal slide takes place and there is contact or it alters the play, call the interference. Otherwise, there is no call.

Also it sounds as though your association needs more discussion as a group on how they are going to consistently make a decision as an organization and not leave up to the individual. Not being critical however, I have seen organizations that have good discussions on interprtations and some that, well, your on your own. but that is probably another thread.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by David Emerling

Let's change just one thing in the above case play and tell me if this might make the non-interference call much more difficult to make.

F6 air mails the ball over F3's head and BR advances to 2nd on the wild throw.

Try to sell that non-interference call. Good luck.

You cannot assume interference merely because of a bad throw. Given that between the OP and your addendum, there is nothing that indicates that there was an altering of the fielder's play, I don't have interference.

Originally Posted by David Emerling

The umpire would have to say that the wild throw and the runner's attempt to take out the pivot man were not related.

Let's look at it conversely--the umpire would have to say that the bad throw was caused by the slide. Try justifying that one without evidence.

Originally Posted by David Emerling

It was just a bad throw having absolutely nothing to do with the runner sliding into 2nd. Although I can see that being a possibility - I don't think I would want to go there.

Make the above call and I guarantee you'll end up having to eject the defensive manager.

That comes with the job.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by David Emerling

I have a copy of the 2006 BRD and play 171-320 is not only a stark example of the interpretation of the rule - but, in my opinion, it goes a bit overboard.

Play 171-320: FED only. Bases loaded: B1 grounds to F4, who fields the ball and throws to F6 to start the double play. F6 catches the throw and forces out R1 as F6 crosses the bag to the right field side. F6 now throws to first as retired R1 begins his slide into second. Retired R1's slide is clearly to the right side of the bag (the side F6 is now on). R1 is sliding towards F6, but he misses the shortstop by a foot or two as F6 keeps moving after the throw. F6's throw is in time to retire BR at 1B; meanwhile, R3 scores. Ruling: Even though it is obvious the runner is illegally sliding toward the fielder, it is not interference. The ball remains alive: two out, R3 in, R2 on third.

One of the NFHS rules guys (I forget who) opined on this play several years ago on one of the internet forums and issued the opinion that "no contact = no interference."

Frankly, I think he's wrong.

If the slide is through the bag, then contact is needed. If the slide is toward the fielder, then contact is not needed. That's how I read 2-Slide-Illegal (whatever the section number is). The words "and makes contact" are in some of the specific rules, but not in the "fails to slide directly toward the bag" rule.

IT's been noted many, mnay times before, but FED hasn't changes the ruling.

[ManInBlue]

If he slides toward the fielder, I've got INT. The rule states he must slide "directly into the base" - unless he's going away from the fielder.

concerning the OP - no in both cases.

[zm1283]

Is it correct to say the runner at second on a force has to get down or get out of the way? I had a runner today who stayed upright and ran into 2B as F4 was catching and throwing. The defense ended up turning the double play and the play at first was a banger. I was going to call interference on the runner coming to 2B since he didn't slide or get out of the base path.

Also, what mechanic would you guys use when that happens? Safe for the B/R at first, followed by calling him out for interference, or just go straight to the interference call?

[ManInBlue]

Originally Posted by zm1283

Also, what mechanic would you guys use when that happens? Safe for the B/R at first, followed by calling him out for interference, or just go straight to the interference call?

TIME! (hands up) That's Interference. (point) Out at second (hammer toward 2B) out at first (hammer toward 1B)

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by zm1283

Is it correct to say the runner at second on a force has to get down or get out of the way? I had a runner today who stayed upright and ran into 2B as F4 was catching and throwing. The defense ended up turning the double play and the play at first was a banger. I was going to call interference on the runner coming to 2B since he didn't slide or get out of the base path.

Also, what mechanic would you guys use when that happens? Safe for the B/R at first, followed by calling him out for interference, or just go straight to the interference call?

No FED 8.4.2.b2 " Runners are never required to slide, but if a runner elects to slide, the slide must be legal.

A runner can stay upright as long as he makes no attempt to alter the play.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by jicecone

No FED 8.4.2.b2 " Runners are never required to slide, but if a runner elects to slide, the slide must be legal.

A runner can stay upright as long as he makes no attempt to alter the play.

I agree that's what the rule says, but I read it as "if he slides it must be legal; if he doesn't slide, he must run in a direction away from the play."

Again, this has been discussed many times, and no clarification from the FED (other than the one interp several years ago where R1 was "lesss than halfway" to second when he was hit by a throw.)

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by jicecone

A runner can stay upright as long as he makes no attempt to alter the play.

Be careful here: the rule sets a much higher standard that what you suggest. The relevant rule for interference when a runner does not slide is 8-4-2(b):

Originally Posted by rule book

(Any runner is out for interference when he ...) does not legally slide and causes illegal contact and/or illegally alters the actions of a fielder in the immediate act of making a play

Here are 3 distinct standards:

1. Runner must make no attempt to alter the play.
2. Runner must attempt to avoid altering the play.
3. Runner must avoid altering the play.

The first two concern what the runner is trying to do. The rule says nothing about what the runner is trying to do. If he makes illegal contact or illegally alters the play, then he is guilty of interference, whether he was attempting to alter the play or attempting to avoid the fielder.

In other words, the third standard applies: he must successfully avoid altering the play.

Bob referred to the definition of an illegal slide. Here it is:

Originally Posted by rule book

ART. 2 . . . A slide is illegal if:
a. the runner uses a rolling, cross-body or pop-up slide into the fielder, or
b. the runner’s raised leg is higher than the fielder’s knee when the fielder is
in a standing position, or
c. the runner goes beyond the base and then makes contact with or alters the
play of the fielder, or
d. the runner slashes or kicks the fielder with either leg, or
e. the runner tries to injure the fielder, or
f. the runner, on a force play, does not slide on the ground and in a direct line
between the two bases.

Bob pointed out that clause (c) refers to making contact; clause (f) does not, nor does it even refer to altering the play.

[David B]

Originally Posted by ManInBlue

If he slides toward the fielder, I've got INT. The rule states he must slide "directly into the base" - unless he's going away from the fielder.

concerning the OP - no in both cases.

That's what the OP is talking about. Be careful, there is intent written into the rule. Just because he slides toward the fielder a little and there is no alteration of play, no need to be calling a DP.

In order to get the DP, there should be alteration of the play. There are some very good threads on this topic in the archives, I could not get the link to work right, but it covers this extensively with all of the rules notated.

Thanks
David

[DG]

Originally Posted by David Emerling

The umpire would have to say that the wild throw and the runner's attempt to take out the pivot man were not related. It was just a bad throw having absolutely nothing to do with the runner sliding into 2nd. Although I can see that being a possibility - I don't think I would want to go there.

Make the above call and I guarantee you'll end up having to eject the defensive manager.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

I would rather call the FPSR, evidence that play was altered is the bad throw, and eject the offensive manager if he wants to be ejected, instead of rewarding him for teaching his players to play illegally.

I can also see a bad throw being a possibility without INT but altered throws due to runners sliding illegally generally are awkard looking from the start. Picture this, F4 jumps in the air to avoid runner sliding illegally at him and makes a bad throw. I am NOT rewarding the offense for this illegal activity.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by DG

evidence that play was altered is the bad throw

Wrong, but you seem to correct yourself...

Originally Posted by DG

I can also see a bad throw being a possibility without INT but altered throws due to runners sliding illegally generally are awkard looking from the start. Picture this, F4 jumps in the air to avoid runner sliding illegally at him and makes a bad throw.

Then you have an altered play, and you can justify the INT call.

[DG]

We are judge of whether play was altered, but slide toward the fielder is clearly illegal, so judge on the side of penalizing illegal if there is any question about it.

As a friend once told me about a balk he called, coach complained because he said he teaches him that move - well coach, don't blame me when I catch him doing something illegal you taught him.