The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #46 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 08, 2010, 10:37am
ODJ ODJ is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 390
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.
Reply With Quote
  #47 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 08, 2010, 10:40am
Stop staring at me swan.
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,974
Time of pitch...I believe.
__________________
It's like Deja Vu all over again
Reply With Quote
  #48 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 08, 2010, 03:37pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,729
Official

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

Quote:
"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."
Reply With Quote
  #49 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 08, 2010, 04:55pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,741
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim C View Post
I received the following this morning form the NFHS Rules Committee Chair:
As far as I'm concerned, this doesn't change much.
Reply With Quote
  #50 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 08, 2010, 05:01pm
M.A.S.H.
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim C View Post
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)
Reply With Quote
  #51 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 08, 2010, 05:55pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim C View Post
Rich, Eliot said: "It is not an umpire judgement if a throw was of quality or not . . . ANY throw, with the batter runner violating the runners lane rule, is all that is neccessay."

One of the viewers asked about a throw 20' over the BR's head and F3. Eliot noted that if the runner was in violation he is out.

T
Does it at least have to be in the general direction of 1B?
__________________
Rich Ives
Different does not equate to wrong
Reply With Quote
  #52 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 08, 2010, 08:00pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,716
No problem here, on Saturday I had to explain to top coaches that stepping into dead ball territory with both feet after a catch is a dead ball, 12 players are not allowed in live ball territory when a run is scored and the batter is out for interference with R1 and no outs, on a steal of second.

I am completely confident that they will understand that even though the opposing catchers arm sucks, their honor roll scholar is out for not being in the lane.

I am fully expecting at least one of them to say, "Oh yea, Situation #7 of this years Rule Interps, Gee thanks."
Reply With Quote
  #53 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 08, 2010, 08:07pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,741
I suppose I can manage to call it. But what annoys me is that the FED wants this called with no judgment involved because umpires spent years simply not calling it. Hell, I've ended a game on RLI.
Reply With Quote
  #54 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 09, 2010, 02:36am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 1,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim C View Post
Bob, in the video conference Eliot Hopkins told the SRI's that ANY throw would be all that is neccessary. He was clear that quality of the throw had nothing to do with the running lane violation.
The rule says the infraction is ignored if the act does not interfere with a fielder or a throw. I can understand calling INT if the lane-violating B/R is directly between 1st base and F2 (or whoever is fielding the ball), and the throw is sailed way over F3's head.

But when the fielder has a clear shot to 1st, the B/R is interfering with neither the throw nor F3 and by rule, the infraction should be ignored. I didn't need an interpretation to call that play correctly. Now it's all F'ed up and I'm probably going to take a lot of crap for enforcing a rule as I have been told to enforce it. Good job.
Reply With Quote
  #55 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 09, 2010, 07:27am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by dash_riprock View Post
The rule says the infraction is ignored if the act does not interfere with a fielder or a throw. I can understand calling INT if the lane-violating B/R is directly between 1st base and F2 (or whoever is fielding the ball), and the throw is sailed way over F3's head.

But when the fielder has a clear shot to 1st, the B/R is interfering with neither the throw nor F3 and by rule, the infraction should be ignored. I didn't need an interpretation to call that play correctly. Now it's all F'ed up and I'm probably going to take a lot of crap for enforcing a rule as I have been told to enforce it. Good job.
I feel your pain. Once the concept of "quality throw" is on board, it seems unfair for the defense to get a cheap out for RLI based on a crap play.

As you know, however, FED doesn't want to tax its umpires any more than necessary, and judging a "quality throw" on this rare play is taxing (or it is for many in my association, at least). So any throw will do.

Many in my association will cheer for the cheap out, regardless of whether the result is "good baseball." I console myself with the thought that it ain't the worst thing in FEDlandia (hey, that's not a bad thread title...).
__________________
Cheers,
mb
Reply With Quote
  #56 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 09, 2010, 09:04am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 17,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by dash_riprock View Post
The rule says the infraction is ignored if the act does not interfere with a fielder or a throw. I can understand calling INT if the lane-violating B/R is directly between 1st base and F2 (or whoever is fielding the ball), and the throw is sailed way over F3's head.

But when the fielder has a clear shot to 1st, the B/R is interfering with neither the throw nor F3 and by rule, the infraction should be ignored. I didn't need an interpretation to call that play correctly. Now it's all F'ed up and I'm probably going to take a lot of crap for enforcing a rule as I have been told to enforce it. Good job.
According to the POE (from Officials' Quarterly, which I assume is the same as what's in the rules book): "Umpires and coaches must also be aware the just because the BR is outside the line, interference should not be called unless the location of the BR outside the running lane altered the play."
Reply With Quote
  #57 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 10, 2010, 08:30pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbyron View Post
I feel your pain. Once the concept of "quality throw" is on board, it seems unfair for the defense to get a cheap out for RLI based on a crap play.

As you know, however, FED doesn't want to tax its umpires any more than necessary, and judging a "quality throw" on this rare play is taxing (or it is for many in my association, at least). So any throw will do.

Many in my association will cheer for the cheap out, regardless of whether the result is "good baseball." I console myself with the thought that it ain't the worst thing in FEDlandia (hey, that's not a bad thread title...).
Its not a cheap out, its a deserved out, being "good baseball" by the defense. I understand the "quality" throw thing, but unless F2 shoots it straight up in the air like a rocket, this should be RLI.

Weve all been around long enough to know the BR is trying to get in the way of the throw, block F3, etc... The defense is doing what its supposed to do, field the ball, and get it to first.
And so if F2 zings it 10 feet over F3s head, Maybe its because he was trying to throw it over the guy, the guy who is where he shouldnt be, because hes trying to cause that exact action by the catcher?
We are out there to see the game is played fairly, and neither team gets an unfair advantage....Im thinking that this would qualify, not a cheap out, but a deserved one.
And so you dont penalize the BR for an obvious intentional act, violating a rule, as F2 tried to overcome that? But he overcomes it too much and throws a few feet too high?...
Reply With Quote
  #58 (permalink)  
Old Fri Mar 12, 2010, 04:53am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Fort Mill, SC
Posts: 770
This is a bit off topic, but why does RLI only cover BR to first? It seems like the rule should either apply in all situations or not at all.

Why did the rule come into the game? Were batters purposely bunting in front of the plate and running zig-zags to first?
__________________
Andrew Senger
Webmaster: RefVB.com
Reply With Quote
  #59 (permalink)  
Old Fri Mar 12, 2010, 09:08am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by yawetag View Post
This is a bit off topic, but why does RLI only cover BR to first? It seems like the rule should either apply in all situations or not at all.

Why did the rule come into the game? Were batters purposely bunting in front of the plate and running zig-zags to first?
Like all rules, the RLI rule tries to strike a balance between offense and defense.

The defense always has to throw around runners who are legally running the bases. But only the BR can deliberately put a batted (bunted) ball directly behind a runner (himself) and set up a kind of interference.

The RLI limits the batter's ability to hinder the defense in this way.
__________________
Cheers,
mb
Reply With Quote
  #60 (permalink)  
Old Fri Mar 12, 2010, 10:56am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 685
Bad news folks

Here is the sum total of a conversation with the chair of the FED rules committee. Out of respect to him, I will not put his e-mails on the thread, just a few tidbits:

"..."quality" throw is NOT part of the rule. We have too many instances where the catcher lobs it over the runner or tries to throw around him, etc., trying not to hit him, but still throwing. That is still the runner's creation by violating the rule. So, if the BR is violating the running lane, and a throw is made, we have interference. The only exception is: if the throw is from the foul side and the BR is out of the lane on the fair side, or vice versa."

Further....

"This is NOT a change. This interpretation (any throw is enough for RLI, my addition) has been in place for 25+ years.... Across the nation, this has worked well. Frankly, right now, umpires are doing a lousy job of enforcing this rule and that is why it is a Point of Emphasis. There will be no effort to change it.

Take it FWIW. I disagree with some things he says, but I am not on the rules committee yet.

Last edited by jkumpire; Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 11:19am.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

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
Batter Hit By Throw while running out of three foot zone. LeeBallanfant Baseball 27 Mon Mar 01, 2010 12:22pm
Three-foot running lane question. kfo9494 Softball 4 Wed Jan 21, 2009 05:12pm
ASA 3-foot running lane SRW Softball 9 Tue Feb 19, 2008 04:38pm
3 foot lane benbret Softball 17 Thu Apr 06, 2006 01:25pm
Three Foot Running Lane batterup Baseball 5 Wed Jun 06, 2001 10:06am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:24am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1