Carl Childress's March 13 rules article contains the following hypothetical:

"The only way we can ever be sure that Smitty knows the rules is when we see him answer a question like the following:

Play 2: True or False. NFHS rules apply. R2. B1 swings and misses for strike three. The ball gets away from the catcher and rolls into the path of the batter, who kicks it into a marked dead ball area. The umpire is certain the kick was accidental. He correctly scores R2 and sends B1 to second.

Umpires who write "True" may call with me anytime."

I hate to think that I am now an old smitty, and I regularly score well on the rules exams. But I answered this Play "False." I conceptualized this as a legally pitched ball that is deflected out of play that results in a one-base award, time of pitch. Mr. Childress obviously conceptualizes this as a fair batted ball that is deflected out of play resulting in a two-base award.

Why am I wrong?

I would have awarded one base, too. Leaves R2 on 3B and BR on 1B.

However, Fed often does not parallel OBR, so maybe this is a Fed exception.

I've been trained to watch to judge for what impetus causes the ball to go out of play, and to judge whether the ball would have gone out of play on its own absent of any subsequent impetus should it be accidentally deflected. In the situation presented, it doesn't appear that the pitch would have gone to DBT as a result of the impetus or absent of the runner's accidental impetus. Under Fed rule I'd see this no different than a fair ball that is hit through F5's legs striking R3 sliding into 3B and being deflected into the 3B dugout.

In Carl's article I would have agreed with him in his ruling but disagreed with him in his statement:
<ul>Umpires who write "True" may call with me anytime.</ul>
Those who know us would not necessarily expect that statement to apply to <u>all</u> umpires who agree with him on this issue.........LOL.


Freix

Freix:

In the NAPBL Umpires Manual, the section on deflected balls into DBT (I think § 3.8 but I don't have it with me) suggests that the "impetus" of an errant throw does not change from the fielder who threw the ball to the fielder who deflected it into DBT unless the latter gains possession of the ball before deflecting it.

Thus, the impetus of the ball remained with the pitcher and does not change to the batter-runner in the hypothetical who deflects the ball without possessing it.

What do you think?

The closest thing I could find in the 2003 BRD, article 36, says, for a deliberately deflected pitch, one base if the pitch would have gone dead anyhow and two bases if would not have gone dead.

Article 267 says, in play 100-267, that if the interference not deliberate, the results of the play stand.

Well, "rolls into the path of the batter" doesn't sound as if it was going out of play on its own. And it does say the batter kicks it. Two bases.

case book
 

Does rule 8-3-3 I in 2002 FED case book, page 61, clear this up?

It is no longer a pitch when the catcher drops it, and its momentum as a pitch is over.

It was an unintentional deflection, so the batter is not to blame.

When a live ball goes to dead ball territory, unless it's a pitch or a throw from the rubber, the award is 2 bases. Right?

<i>When a live ball goes to dead ball territory, unless it's a pitch or a throw from the rubber, the award is 2 bases. Right?</i>

I thought there was another, albeit much rarer, play in which the ball goes out of play and it's neither a pitch nor a throw from the rubber nor a throw by a fielder. The only book I have with me here at work is ASA 2003, but I seem to remember something similar in all the books: "When a fielder loses possession of a ball, such as on an attempted tag, and the ball enters the dead ball area . . . each runner is awarded one base from the last base touched at the time the ball entered the dead ball area. . . ."

I had this play last year. Abel on 2B. Baker hits a ground ball to F6, and Abel tries to advance. F6 swipes his glove at Abel in an attempt to tag him. The glove hits Abel's knee, but the ball pop outs and shoots into DBT. I thought it was one base from where the runner was at the point the ball went into DBT. Since, when the ball went out, Abel was between 2B and 3B and Baker had not reached 1B, I gave them 3B and 1B, respectively.

Or this one: Abel is caught in a rundown between 1B and 2B. As Abel retreats to 1B, the throw beats him. The fielder puts the glove on the ground, but as Abel slides in, he knocks the ball loose and it goes into the dugout. I thought Abel got one base in that situation, not two.

And what about this? Abel is on 2B and Baker hits a foul pop that F2 catches near the dugout. F2 takes a couple of steps back toward his position and then drops the ball, which hits his shoe and rolls into the dugout. I thought Abel got one base only in that situation.

If this applies to baseball too, then I would say that F2 lost control of the ball. He didn't throw it.

When considering a pitch or throw from the rubber, the concept of impetus is of importance in determining a 1 base vs. 2 base award.

With regards to a deflected batted ball or one thrown from other than the rubber going to DBT, <u>the award will be 2 bases</u> and the concept of gaining possession deals moreso in determining whether the award is based from TOP (batted ball) and TOT (thrown ball) vs. the actual time of incident (ball or fielder going to DBT). A fielder's momentum can also become an issue in determing from which point the 2 base award is based upon.

There are too many possibilities to discuss in a single post, but review of the NAPBL will aid anyone significantly. J/R does a more thorough job of addressing momentum.


Just my opinion,

Freix

My summary:

1) The OBR and FED rules on "deflections" out of play are different, although they will result in the same decisions much of the time.

2) ASA is also different (apparently, at least -- based on greymule's play).

3) Greymule first answered "one base", then "two", then "one" again. IF he'd only answer "three" and "four" he could be sure to be right. ;)

4) I agree with Carl -- two bases.

This doesn't sit well with me in thinking of CS/FP. Absent the unintentional kick, the batter-runner would perhaps be out or perhaps reach first base, but he is very unlikely to reach second. Indeed, I agree that the catcher missed his opportunity to catch the ball, but because the batter kicked the ball accidentally, does he lose his opportunity to retrieve it?

I can't see making this call in a real-life situation. Anyone who didn't know the rules would say I gave the batter second base after he kicked the ball out of play, and would see it as ridiculous.

More thoughts, please?

P-Sz

Real simple, judge it intentional! Wack him out, make everybody happy and move on with the game!!!! Most all of the fields I work would take one helluva kick to get the ball into BDT, so , fortuanately I will (hopefully) never see this stuff.....chris

Pat: CS/FP is for those times when the rules are ambiguous. FED 8-4-1a: The batter-runner is out when he <b>intentionally</b> [my emphasis] interferes with the catcher's attempt to field the ball after a third strike.

Now, how are you going to explain your "common sense" ruling to a coach who knows the rules?

Don't waste your energy on easy plays.

The question here is an award of one or two bases. I never wanted to call this guy out.

Let me be sure I understand the letter of the law. Since the BR provided the impetus required for the ball to reach DBT, it is not considered a pitch but rather as any other live ball, thus a two base award.

Now, everyone is going to see that the batter kicked the ball out of play, and everyone is going to think that batter is in trouble. I can't see giving the batter TWO bases when he would have never gotten two bases had he not kicked the ball.

It would be easier to deal the rare coach that would know this rule than it would be to silence the common coach that has no clue what the rule is, but he absolutely knows you don't give the batter who just struck out second base because he kicked the ball out of play.

P-Sz

Let me get this straight: You agree the award should be two bases. You agree the batter is not out. So you announce publicly that you would ignore what is correct and do what is expedient.

Do I have the situation properly diagnosed?

When it comes to awards, Pat, sometimes you just have to follow the rules.

I just got in from doing a Fed game where a batter hit the ball to the plate causing a very high hop to occur up the 1B line about 3 ft. fair. F2 jumps out to glove it while the batter is hightailin' up the 1B line. However, whallah! Where did the ball go? As it came down it apparently came off the catcher's glove and he attempted to pin it to his chest--but he couldn't find it. Nobody else saw it drop to the ground. He spins several times looking for the ball, but it's nowhere to be found......until about 10 seconds later when he realizes that it has gone down his chest protector. The crowd got quite a chuckle from the play.

To the objection of the defensive coach, I awarded 2 bases to the batter. It seems like this runner should not get 2 bases as he likely felt lucky in reaching 1B safely. Still, the award is 2 bases---as I suspect the coach has by now found out after looking it up when he got home......LOL.

$hit happens.........


Freix

No, I'm just not sure yet, and I'm hoping to get some more opinions. All, please speak up: what would you do?

And if I did decide to ignore the correct ruling (two bases), it would be because the one base award seems more just. It would be somewhat easier to sell, though that's more of a bonus and not really a reason. I'm still unsure, so I'm looking for more opinion.

P-Sz

Pat: If you were in my association, we wouldn't permit to call with that attitude.

You're looking for "opinion." Opinion deals with whether we should attack Iraq, spend more money on education, execute murderers. I'm delighted to hear opinion on subjects where opinion counts.

Listen to what you say: "one base award seems more just."
Who the heck are you to decide what is just?

Listen to what you say: "it would be somewhat easier to sell."

As I am wont to say: Amazing!

You're not interested in anything other than finding someone who will put his career on the line by supporting you.

I'll bow out now. After all these years, Pat, you're still a dilettante.

BR hits a ground ball that lodges into the pocket of the umpires shirt. Would this be a one or two base award?

According to the rule book it could be a one base award because it hit the umpire. However, it could be a two base award because it lodge into his shirt pocket.

Make the call!

Greg

Note the differences between a pitched ball, thrown ball (from either on or off the pitching rubber), and a batted ball.


Freix

This was a useful thread. The play that started it is covered specifically in the rules, and a check of even one of the baseball books on my shelf would have produced the answer. The books also cover my "dropped ball" situation. Two bases. It may not seem "just," but it's not a matter of opinion. After all, we could all list a dozen rules we believe to be unjust.

As far as collecting opinions goes, it reminds me of when I owned a high-end audio store and people would come in and say, "I'm collecting opinions about what the best amplifier is. What do you think?" As if one buys an electronic product (or applies a ruling) based on a poll. The best electronics were often those that most people had never heard of. The correct rulings are often those that most people don't know.

Apparently if a runner is lucky enough to deflect a ball into DBT unintentionally, he gets two bases, which after all my years in baseball I did not know. If a runner is returning to 1B (say, on a pickoff) and he slides into the tag and unintentionally kicks the ball into DBT, he gets 3B, even though the throw did not provide the impetus.

Greymule: Which rule(s) "specifically covers" the original play?

I have been researching this since Childress's article and still think that the batter-runner unintentionally deflected a legal pitch into DBT resulting in a one-base award. 8.3.3l does not cover this situation as one post argued. Childress is absolutely certain that the rules specify a two-base award, and I accept his interpretation as an "authoritative opinion." But I am curious as to Childress's sources, which he has blithely not cited in his two posted replies.

OBR 7.05h Approved ruling. "If [a] pitched . . . ball goes through or by the catcher . . . and remains on the playing field, and is subsequently kicked into [DBT], the awarding shall be two bases from position of the runners at the time of the pitch. . . ." Notice that "is kicked" doesn't limit the kick to the fielder.

PBUC 3.8 says the same thing in more detail.

J/R 8-B: A <b>subsequent push</b> of a pitch or in-contact throw occurs when such pitch or throw is errant, but would have remained on the playing field, and a fielder subsequently pushes (kicks, deflects, etc.) the ball (itself) into DBT or the ball becomes lodged due to push or deflection. Each runner is awarded two bases beyond his TOP base.

J/R goes on to stipulate that the push must be unintentional. I am aware that this does say the <i>fielder</i> kicked the ball.

Both PBUC and J/R give many examples.

I'm sure it's somewhere in the BRD, too.

Thank you, Greymule. I don't have J/R and I previously didn't think 7.05(h) AR applied because of the fielder versus batter-runner distinction, but your analysis is persuasive and dispositive.

"If your catcher catches the ball, skip, we don't even have this discussion. Two bases."