Ball hits runner

[Johnny Ringo]

Runner on second, ground ball hit to SS. SS charges the ball and misses it. Ball hits runner. Is the runner out?

Umpires decision was he was not out because fielder attempted to make play on ball. Is there ever an instance where the runner is not out if the ball hits them?

[Dave Reed]

The MLBUM offers the following summary:
A runner is out when struck by a batted ball (unintentional on the part of the runner) unless:
(1) The ball has been touched by an infielder
(2) The ball has passed through or by an infielder (i.e., through the infielder's legs or past the reach of the infielder attempting to field the ball AND no other infielder has a chance to make a play on the ball.

[lawump]

Originally Posted by Johnny Ringo

Runner on second, ground ball hit to SS. SS charges the ball and misses it. Ball hits runner. Is the runner out?

As Dave Reed's post implies, you have not given us enough information. If F6 truly did not touch the ball when he missed it, then the issue becomes whether or not another defensive player (i.e. F5) had a chance to make a play on the ball. If yes, then R2 is out. If no, then "that's nothing!" and the ball remains live.

[Johnny Ringo]

No, there was no other defensive player in the area. Basically what happened was the SS missed the ball and it then hit the runner.

[bob jenkins]

The runner is "allowed" to assume that a competent F6 woudl field the ball, so the runner is not out.

[Larry1953]

So if the infield is playing in and F6 is moving laterally toward the hole for the grounder which goes past him by more than a "step and a reach" and the untouched ball hits the runner, R2 would be out, correct? I suppose the OP would need to specify the rule set (of an alternate string theory universe).

[rbmartin]

What rule set are we using?

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by Larry1953

So if the infield is playing in and F6 is moving laterally toward the hole for the grounder which goes past him by more than a "step and a reach" and the untouched ball hits the runner, R2 would be out, correct?

OBR, Yes.

FED & NCAA, No.

That's the way it is. Deal with it.

[Dave Reed]

Rich,
The NCAA rule was changed in 2011. It now says:
The runner, including a runner in contact with a base, is hit while in fair territory by a batted ball before it has touched a fielder or passed all infielders who have a chance to make a play on the ball, other than the
pitcher.....

The phrase "who have a chance to make a play on the ball" was added.

This makes NCAA and OBR effectively the same.

[bob jenkins]

I think the change makes it more like FED. Rich has it right.

[Dave Reed]

Before, the NCAA rule was "passed all infielders, other than the pitcher". That allows one to apply the string interpretation of what constitutes "passed".

Now it is "passed all infielders who have a chance to make a play on the ball, other than the pitcher. " One can't apply a string interpretation given this wording.

How is the new rule different from the following MLBUM interp?
"(unless) The ball has passed through or by an infielder (i.e., through the infielder's legs or past the reach of the infielder attempting to field the ball AND no other infielder has a chance to make a play on the ball."

[Rich Ives]

Within the past year someone posted a response from the NCAA that basically endorsed the string theory.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Dave Reed

Before, the NCAA rule was "passed all infielders, other than the pitcher". That allows one to apply the string interpretation of what constitutes "passed".

Now it is "passed all infielders who have a chance to make a play on the ball, other than the pitcher. " One can't apply a string interpretation given this wording.

How is the new rule different from the following MLBUM interp?
"(unless) The ball has passed through or by an infielder (i.e., through the infielder's legs or past the reach of the infielder attempting to field the ball AND no other infielder has a chance to make a play on the ball."

NCAA and FED use "passed" to mean "farther than"; OBR further restricts it to "through or immediately by" -- a "near miss" if you will.


The examples given in the NCAA conferences over the past two years have made it clear, at least to me, that they have moved from the OBR interp to the FED interp, and that this is what they were trying to convey with the wording change.

[Dave Reed]

OK, I'll accept that they want a FED-like interpretation.

I'm still bemused that "passed all infielders who have a chance to make a play on the ball" could imply fielders other than those who are roughly within a step and a reach as the ball goes by.

[Larry1953]

Originally Posted by Dave Reed

OK, I'll accept that they want a FED-like interpretation.

I'm still bemused that "passed all infielders who have a chance to make a play on the ball" could imply fielders other than those who are roughly within a step and a reach as the ball goes by.

Dave, that wording seems to be the yin to OBR yang. In OBR the rule intends for the runner to be out when hit by a batted ball EXCEPT in very limited circumstances like the ball going through the legs of the fielder. The runner would STILL be out if there were another fielder who could still make the play.

The wording you quote comes pretty close to saying the runner is not out if no fielder has a chance to make a play. That seems to make it even more liberal for the runner than string theory as opposed to making it more like OBR.