Hole in outfield fence at the base of the fence.

[Klokard]

From the time the F8 threw his hands up the BR and all runners should continue running. BU goes out and checks status of ball. If found to be lodged or out of play, runners return. If ball is found to be in play OR reachable (dependant on MATP) runners get what they can. If fielder throws up hands and continues digging, continue out but allow runners to continue. I have actually had an F7 do this in a game on a field that had shrubery on fence. While hussling out there, I saw him try and stuff the ball back into the shrubs.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I am going to take some blame here even though I was the BU in the OP. Normally, whether I am the PU or the BU, when this type of situation is discussed at the pre-game meeting I always remind the coaches to tell their players to raise their hands and to not touch the ball until an umpire goes out and inspects the situation because if they pick up the ball we will consider it still in play, and last night I just forgot to inject my two cents of information into the pre-game meeting.

MTD, Sr.

[Mrumpiresir]

I'm curious as to why you put the runner on second base. The fielder duped the umpires into killing the ball when it should have remained live. The OP said the runner was rounding second and heading for third when time was called. I think it would be appropriate to award the runner the bases he would have attained, in the umpires judgement, if time had not been called. No way I'm letting the defense gain an advantage in this scenario.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Mrumpiresir

I'm curious as to why you put the runner on second base. The fielder duped the umpires into killing the ball when it should have remained live. The OP said the runner was rounding second and heading for third when time was called. I think it would be appropriate to award the runner the bases he would have attained, in the umpires judgement, if time had not been called. No way I'm letting the defense gain an advantage in this scenario.

IF the umpires were duped, then I agree (under FED rules and the CS&FP handbook). IT's not clear to me whether the umpires decided they were duped or that the ball had gone out of play and was then retrieved.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

IF the umpires were duped, then I agree (under FED rules and the CS&FP handbook). IT's not clear to me whether the umpires decided they were duped or that the ball had gone out of play and was then retrieved.

Bob:

We don't think we were duped. The Home-AD told me after the game, that the player raised his hands because the ball went through a hole at the base of the fence thinking that by raising his hands he was telling the umpires that the ball was out of play. He then reached through the ball to retreive the ball thinking that the ball was dead, which we know that while it is dead, it really isn't dead until the BU goes out and inspects the situation. I honestly do not think the player was trying to dupe anybody. We, as an unpiring crew, screwed the pooch on this play.

MTD, Sr.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

He then reached through the ball to retreive the ball thinking that the ball was dead, which we know that while it is dead, it really isn't dead until the BU goes out and inspects the situation. .

It's dead as soon as it goes through the fence. The umpire uses all information available (seeing the ball; seeing the players) to make that decision.

If you weren't duped, then the correct call is a book-rule double.

[waltjp]

If were told during the plate conference that there are spots in the outfield that would allow a ball to pass through or under a fence we make a point of telling the managers that the outfielder should raise his hand so the base ump can go out and check. We also tell the managers that the runners should keep running - we'll reset them if the ball is indeed, out of play. Our final statement is that if the fielder reaches for the ball after raising his hand we're going to judge that the ball is still in play.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

It's dead as soon as it goes through the fence. The umpire uses all information available (seeing the ball; seeing the players) to make that decision.

If you weren't duped, then the correct call is a book-rule double.

Bob:

The point I am trying to make is that we as the umpires never had a chance to rule as to whether the ball was out or not because the player, after raising his hands, apparently reached through the hole in the fence and retrieved the ball. Kids do the darndest things.

MTD, Sr.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by Mrumpiresir

I'm curious as to why you put the runner on second base. The fielder duped the umpires into killing the ball when it should have remained live. The OP said the runner was rounding second and heading for third when time was called. I think it would be appropriate to award the runner the bases he would have attained, in the umpires judgement, if time had not been called. No way I'm letting the defense gain an advantage in this scenario.

Because PU killed (and kicked) it when he called time. Unless you want to rely on 9.01(c), the rules don't support a 3-base (or more) award.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

Because PU killed (and kicked) it when he called time. Unless you want to rely on 9.01(c), the rules don't support a 3-base (or more) award.

Dash: FED rules permit umpires to rectify their own errors that put one team at a disadvantage.

Under OBR, I'd have PU eat his time call and tell the O-coach why his runner has to return to 2B.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

Because PU killed (and kicked) it when he called time. Unless you want to rely on 9.01(c), the rules don't support a 3-base (or more) award.

FED rules have the "correct a situation where a team was disadvataged when an umpire's decision was reversed" rule.

[bniu]

Originally Posted by Mrumpiresir

I'm curious as to why you put the runner on second base. The fielder duped the umpires into killing the ball when it should have remained live. The OP said the runner was rounding second and heading for third when time was called. I think it would be appropriate to award the runner the bases he would have attained, in the umpires judgement, if time had not been called. No way I'm letting the defense gain an advantage in this scenario.

it's best in most situations to simply let the play keep going. You can always send them back. I had a sitch where a shot up the 3rd base line, took a hop, looked like it hit the 3B's shin in fair territory and bounced foul before 3rd base. I called it fair, play happens, whatever...after the play, i go over to my partner and ask this question: "Did you see if the ball hit the 3B?", answer: "Definitely Not!" I rule foul, we send the batter back to hit, runners go back. The runners all just got some free exercise.

[yawetag]

Originally Posted by Klokard

If ball is found to be in play OR reachable (dependant on MATP) runners get what they can.

I'm not sure what MATP means, so it might change my answer, but I disagree with "reachable" (bolding mine):

8-3-3c: two bases if a fair batted or thrown ball becomes dead because of bouncing over or passing through a fence...

Baserunning Awards Table - Two Bases - 1: Fa¡r batted ball bounces over, through, goes under, lodges ¡n or under fence

Amazingly, I can't find a Case Play for a ball rolling through a fence.

[Mrumpiresir]

8-3-3c does not apply here because the ball never passed under or through or over a fence. I am thinking if we can use judgement as to where to place a runner if spectator interference occurs, why couldn't we award bases for a fielder successfully duping the umpires? Could this be a legitimate use of 9.01(c)?