FED - Three-Foot Running Lane

[ODJ]

Previous interps of the RLV by BR said if BR's left foot was touching completely outside the RL, then violation. If the right foot was touching the FB line when the throw occurs, nothing. Yes, the BR could be violating or legal depending on which foot is touching the ground.

Where my brain fails me (among other things) is if the instance of violation is at time of throw or when the ball passes (or hits) the BR.

[johnnyg08]

Time of pitch...I believe.

[Tim C]

I received the following this morning form the NFHS Rules Committee Chair:

"Yes, high school wants a play to be made, but we are not going to penalize them for not making a good play. So, "quality" is not a criteria. Just need to make the throw. We have a lot of catchers/infielders who might sail it over a BR's head, not trying to hit them."

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Tim C

I received the following this morning form the NFHS Rules Committee Chair:

As far as I'm concerned, this doesn't change much.

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by Tim C

I received the following this morning form the NFHS Rules Committee Chair:

This position seems to be supported by this year's Interps.

From this year's (2010) Rule Interps:

SITUATION 7: B1 lays down a bunt that is fielded by F2 in fair territory a few feet in front of home plate. As B1 is 60 feet from home base, he is running outside the running lane with one foot completely in fair ground and not touching the lines of the running lane. F2 fields the ball and (a) attempts to throw to first but throws high into right field as he tries not to hit B1, or (b) does not attempt a throw. RULING: B1 is required to be in the running lane the last 45 feet to first base when the ball is fielded and thrown from an area behind him. In (a), this is interference and B1 is out and the ball is declared dead. In (b), since there was no throw, there is no interference. F2 is not required to hit B1 to demonstrate that B1 is out of the running lane, but a throw must be made for the interference to be declared. (8-4-1g)

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by Tim C

I received the following this morning form the NFHS Rules Committee Chair:

Quality of the throw is not a [criterion], but the B/R must interfere with either the throw or the fielding of it for there to be a violation.

[chuckfan1]

.......I can understand trying to read the throw from F2 in determining if it is truly Running Lane Int...... But if I see the batter-runner out of the lane, and weve all seen it, sometimes they make almost a left turn into fair territory, its pretty safe judgement he is trying to interfere with the throw.
With that, whether F2 throws the ball one foot over, or six feet over F3's head, isnt the cause heavily weighed on the side of INT by BR? Do we automatically determine that since the throw was six feet over F3's head, its more of a bad throw than INT?
Meaning, in watching the play, F2 is trying to get his throw to first, around/over/ the BR? And in seeing him trying to get his throw to first he tries to throw over the BR, because the BR is out of the lane. So what, if F2 lobs it a couple feet higher, the percentages would have to extremely high that the high throw was caused by BR not being where he is supposed to.
This does fall under the sometimes "ya just gotta umpire"...
On these, grab the call by the balls, and call INT.
--The BR is not where he is supposed to be
--In reading the play, we can tell he is trying to interfere. (True, we cant get inside the BR's mind, but come on, we know what it is.
--F2F1 etc is doing what he is supposed to. Fields the ball, and tries to retire BR
--Throws the ball over the heads of BR/F1 due to the INT.....
--Unless the ball goes straight up into the air like a rocket, its INT.

Your honor, the evidence is weighted heavily on the side of the Defense...