Fair or Foul?
 

These two FED case studies seem to contradict...what say you?

2.5.1 SITUATION E: The batter hits the ball, drops the bat and it unintentionally
hits the ball a second time in (a) fair territory and is either touched by a fielder
and/or comes to rest in fair territory; (b) foul territory and is either touched by
a fielder and/or comes to rest in either fair or foul territory; or (c) fair territory and
is either touched by a fielder and/or comes to rest in foul territory. RULING: In (a)
and (c), the ball is fair. In (b), the ball is foul.

2.16.1 SITUATION D: B1’s bunt rolls up the first-base line where it hits B1’s bat
that was lying on the ground in fair territory. The ball deflects into foul territory.
Is the ball fair or foul? RULING: The ball is foul, provided the bat was not placed
there intentionally. The bat is considered to be part of the playing field. (2-5-1, 2-
8-1, 8-4-1d)

I say it's been discussed a hundred times on this and other boards, and I agree.

Two more rulings that make FED different from OBR. God forbid that they model their rules after OBR, especially when there isn't a safety concern.

For what it's worth, there is no contradiction. One ruling deals with the bat hitting the ball and the other ruling deals with the ball hitting the bat. There are seperate rulings on these situations in OBR as well.

The first one requires us to determine the intent of an inanimate object, i.e., a baseball bat.

"...For what it's worth, there is no contradiction..." between 2.5.1 (E) and 2.16.1 (D)

So, in a FED game accoprding to 2.5.1 (E), if the batter unintentionally drops his bat into the pathway of his batted ball and the moving bat touches the ball in fair territory, an umpire should signal FAIR at that moment, even if the ball continues rolling untouched into foul territory (and stops) after deflecting off the bat?

If that's the case, then I will have to change my understanding of this particular case of FED fair/foul...

". . . drops the bat and it unintentionally hits the ball . . ."

It's hard to believe that even Fed wouldn't catch that particular absurdity.

I used to do Fed but always assumed it followed OBR, and in the rules meetings nobody ever mentioned this significant difference. I'm glad I never had to deal with a case of bat hitting ball in fair territory.

I fixed this a long time ago;

"Coach, in my opinion, the batter did not intentionally cause interference. The ball is foul/fair. Let's play ball."

I could never be bothered with the BS about deciding what the intent of an inanimate object was, so I just assumed innocent until proven guilty on the batter (an animate object?). :eek:

What??????
 

Ozzy, you mean you didn't ask the bat about it's intent? I am surprised at you!

obr and ncaa
 

can anyone tell me the obr and ncaa rulings for these situations?
thks.

Do over and ejection (jk) ;)