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.

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

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.

No, the batter runner must either be in the lane or out of the lane during the throw.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by jicecone

No, the batter runner must either be in the lane or out of the lane during the throw.

Huh? Of course there is no violation if the B/R is in the running lane (unless the interference is intentional). This entire discussion is predicated on the B/R running outside the lane.

See 8-4-1-g-1. If the B/R has not interfered with the throw or the catch, what are you penalizing him for?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

Huh? Of course there is no violation if the B/R is in the running lane (unless the interference is intentional). This entire discussion is predicated on the B/R running outside the lane.

See 8-4-1-g-1. If the B/R has not interfered with the throw or the catch, what are you penalizing him for?

Agreed, but under FED (according to T), the runner is presumed to have interfered with the throw if the runner is (approximately) in a line between F2 and F3

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Agreed, but under FED (according to T), the runner is presumed to have interfered with the throw if the runner is (approximately) in a line between F2 and F3

That's how I understand the "clarification" in the FED interps. It's the "any throw if the B/R is out of the lane" concept I have a problem with.