F8 carries ball over fence

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by UmpTTS43

I don't know what your MLBUM says, but mine says "If a fielder has complete possession of a batted or thrown ball and subsequently deflects or kicks the ball out of play, the award is two bases from the position of the runners at the time the ball was kicked or deflected." copyright 2009

A fielder leaving the field of play with possession is the same as deflecting it since it was his impetus that made the ball leave said field of play and become dead.

I agree. The OP counts as a kind of "overthrow," even though it's not among the examples given in J/R, Chapter 8. The award is 2 bases from the time the ball went out of play. Keep it simple.

Originally Posted by greymule

From the J/R:

It is an overthrow when . . . (6) a fielder possesses a batted or thrown ball and intentionally enters DBT (the "throw" occurs when he enters DBT).

Note, however, that the J/R does not include unintentional carrying of the ball in its definition of overthrow or distinguish between a caught ball and a mere batted ball.

J/R gives 6 EXAMPLES of overthrows -- those are not DEFINITIONS. The defense caused a ball that was no longer a batted ball to leave live ball territory. That's the definition of an overthrow, and so the rules pertaining to overthrows (2 bases from TOT) apply.

We're used to "catch and carry," which is a kind of exception to the overthrow rule. The rationale for the exception is that, since the defense caught the batted ball, the runners would have to retouch before advancing. That's why they get just one base for catch and carry.

In the OP, we did NOT have a catch, so the exception would not apply.

[greymule]

J/R gives 6 EXAMPLES of overthrows -- those are not DEFINITIONS.

I agree that they are not official definitions. (In fact, overthrow is not defined in the OBR book, so I guess there isn't an official definition.) However, the J/R presents the 6 categories as if all overthrows fall into one of them. If there are other kinds, the J/R should be clear that the 6 are merely examples and do not encompass all overthrows.

I can't quarrel with your reasoning to award two bases by interpreting the OP as "a kind of overthrow." But lacking something in black and white, one could also reasonably judge the OP to be a "kind of catch and carry."

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by greymule

J/R gives 6 EXAMPLES of overthrows -- those are not DEFINITIONS.

I agree that they are not official definitions. (In fact, overthrow is not defined in the OBR book, so I guess there isn't an official definition.) However, the J/R presents the 6 categories as if all overthrows fall into one of them. If there are other kinds, the J/R should be clear that the 6 are merely examples and do not encompass all overthrows.

I can't quarrel with your reasoning to award two bases by interpreting the OP as "a kind of overthrow." But lacking something in black and white, one could also reasonably judge the OP to be a "kind of catch and carry."

They are not 6 categories of overthrow, or they would be labeled as such.

It can't possibly be a "kind of catch and carry" because it's not a catch. That's crucial, since the basis for the exception to the overthrow award is the fact that the runners must retouch after a catch.

[greymule]

They are not 6 categories of overthrow, or they would be labeled as such.

Well, they're 6 types of overthrow, but they're not labeled as examples, either. They certainly could be examples, but it's not fully clear. If I were editing the J/R, it would say, "Some examples of overthrows follow."

Note that with altered bats, the J/R introduces its list with "Examples of altered bats include bats that are:" . . .

But for foul balls, it reads:

"It is a foul ball if a batted ball:" . . .

and then lists 7 categories that cover every kind of foul ball. (The J/R even includes "is touched by the batter in his batter's box, which is not in the official book definition). It doesn't specifically say that all foul balls fall into one of the 7 categories, but they do. These are not just examples of foul balls.

I don't expect rule books to be written like law books, and I can accept that the play in the OP is considered an "overthrow." I'm just saying that the books don't cover it unequivocally.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by greymule

I don't expect rule books to be written like law books, and I can accept that the play in the OP is considered an "overthrow." I'm just saying that the books don't cover it unequivocally.

Agreed. Good examples.