The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #31 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 12, 2012, 08:48am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 769
The caseplay I cited states:

"R2 slides out of the base path in an attempt to prevent F4 from turning the double play."

So at the start of the slide if the runner's intent was to break up the double play by not sliding to the base but at the fielder you have a FPSR violation. You can deduce this attempt by where the fielder slides. That the fielder bobbled the ball or didn't make a throw shouldn't make any difference.
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 12, 2012, 09:27am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Northwest suburbs of Chicago
Posts: 645
Quote:
Originally Posted by umpjim View Post
The caseplay I cited states:

"R2 slides out of the base path in an attempt to prevent F4 from turning the double play."

So at the start of the slide if the runner's intent was to break up the double play by not sliding to the base but at the fielder you have a FPSR violation. You can deduce this attempt by where the fielder slides. That the fielder bobbled the ball or didn't make a throw shouldn't make any difference.
Yes, that is why I have only referenced the rule book with regard to the OP.

For your reference, a misplayed ball does make a difference. While a fielder is protected normally, it can be argued that his error caused the runner to make contact. That very play occured during an NCAA Super Regional last year. The runner was not guilty of interference. The NCAA supported the call.

In Fed ruled ball, I urge you to consider the throw that pulls a fielder into the path of a runner. The defensive error caused the contact and we don't penalize the runner for it, right?
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 12, 2012, 11:22am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 769
The OP was clarified by this:

"As part of the play, F4 had come across the base toward F6 / third. R1 slid toward the fielder, not in a direct line to the base. If F4 had caught the ball, it was a textbook FPSR violation by R1, whether or not there was contact. Does the fact that F4 dropped / deflected the ball change this and is contact (or not) relevant?"

I believe the caseplay justifies calling a FPSR violation on this attempt.

I agree with what you say about defensive error causing contact.
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 12, 2012, 11:28am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Obstruction.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 12, 2012, 04:24pm
In Time Out
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeStrybel View Post
Really? You said that?

In the OP, the runner did not interfere with the throw. The fielder deflected it - the play involves defensive error.
I'm not referring to the OP. In the OP, I would just have an illegal slide, and no FPSR.

My play was on 3-6-3 attempt at a DP when R1 went long and hard at the F6 as he came across the bag to outfield side. F6 was able to avoid the contact, but R1 had bad intent written all over his slide. I don't BS when it comes to player safety.
__________________
I have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?
Reply With Quote
  #36 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 12, 2012, 04:50pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Northwest suburbs of Chicago
Posts: 645
Quote:
Originally Posted by umpjim View Post
The OP was clarified by this:

"As part of the play, F4 had come across the base toward F6 / third. R1 slid toward the fielder, not in a direct line to the base. If F4 had caught the ball, it was a textbook FPSR violation by R1, whether or not there was contact. Does the fact that F4 dropped / deflected the ball change this and is contact (or not) relevant?"

I believe the caseplay justifies calling a FPSR violation on this attempt.
Then you would be incorrect. The rule book does not require a slide directly into the base. It can reached by a hand or foot. The rule has already been cited.

There cannot be a FPSR without the fielder having the ball - it is on the ground near the umpire's "B" position. The runner is not interfering with a defender's ability to relay the ball in the OP. He is not altering the play as the fielder already did that. The runner does not have to be clairvoyant, especially after he is already on the ground anticipating a slide away from the fielder (who then messes up and crosses into his path).

Quote:
I agree with what you say about defensive error causing contact.
You originally wrote that it didn't matter. I am glad to see that you came around. Have a great day.
Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 12, 2012, 04:56pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Northwest suburbs of Chicago
Posts: 645
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder View Post
Obstruction.
Just to remind those new to the game, obstruction is ignored/superseded if the runner does not make a legal slide.

In the OP, I don't believe this to be the case since the fielder caused the ball to be where it is. Even with contact (not malicious), if the fielder could have reached the base with a hand or foot and didn't raise a leg/hand or otherwise impede the fielder, we have baseball. No one said it was supposed to be easy.
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jun 12, 2012, 09:45pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 769
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeStrybel View Post
Then you would be incorrect. The rule book does not require a slide directly into the base. It can reached by a hand or foot. The rule has already been cited.

There cannot be a FPSR without the fielder having the ball - it is on the ground near the umpire's "B" position. The runner is not interfering with a defender's ability to relay the ball in the OP. He is not altering the play as the fielder already did that. The runner does not have to be clairvoyant, especially after he is already on the ground anticipating a slide away from the fielder (who then messes up and crosses into his path).

You originally wrote that it didn't matter. I am glad to see that you came around. Have a great day.
Are you saying that a legal slide on a FPSR can be a reach by hand or foot?

Are you saying that a fielder that hasn't gloved the ball or lost the ball because he was taken out illegally can't be protected by the FPSR?

The runner does not have to be clairvoyant. He should slide directly to the base. He knows a properly trained fielder will step to the 3B side(this is what the OP fielder was doing) or RF side or to the LF side (not in NCAA) of 2B to complete the throw. If the runner slides to one side or the other he probably is doing it to break up the DP.

As far as the obstruction posts go I have to say WTF.
Reply With Quote
  #39 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 13, 2012, 12:30am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Upper Midwest
Posts: 928
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeStrybel View Post
Then you would be incorrect. The rule book does not require a slide directly into the base. It can reached by a hand or foot.
You are on crack.
__________________
"I don't think I'm very happy. I always fall asleep to the sound of my own screams...and then I always get woken up to the sound of my own screams. Do you think I'm unhappy?"
Reply With Quote
  #40 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 13, 2012, 02:26am
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Lakeside, California
Posts: 6,724
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt View Post
You are on crack.
Yeah, change the Chore Boy too while you're at it!

The FPSR is either right at the base, or away from the fielder. Nothing about hand or foot reach. That sounds like something from OBR.
__________________
Matthew 15:14, 1 Corinthians 1:23-25
Reply With Quote
  #41 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 13, 2012, 07:52pm
DG DG is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,022
We also don't know if he was sliding inside the bag to break up a DP. If F4 was on the RF side to receive a good throw but was drawn to other side due to bad throw from F6 after the runner started his slide away from F4 is he guilty of illegal slide? The op does not say why he was sliding inside the bag, but it does say there was a bad throw.

Last edited by DG; Wed Jun 13, 2012 at 07:55pm.
Reply With Quote
  #42 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jun 16, 2012, 09:23am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 64
Thanks to all for the comments on this. Just like our discussions here, not much consensus, excpet that sliding toward the fielder with no contact is nothing in NCAA. It might be something in FED.

The most common answer (when there was contact) was to get one out for interference but not the second out because it wasn't a force play slide rule anymore. That was still not a majority answer, though.
Reply With Quote
  #43 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jun 16, 2012, 12:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caesar's Ghost View Post
....not much consensus, excpet that sliding toward the fielder with no contact is nothing in NCAA. It might be something in FED.
How did you get that idea? The NCAA rule (quoted in post #24 of this thread) specifically says "with or without contact" in c(1). The actual qualifying factors are whether the slide "altered the play of the fielder" and if the slide was not directly to base.

The primary difference to FED is the NCAA rules allow the runner to overslide the bag.
Reply With Quote
  #44 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jun 16, 2012, 08:21pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Reed View Post
How did you get that idea? The NCAA rule (quoted in post #24 of this thread) specifically says "with or without contact" in c(1). The actual qualifying factors are whether the slide "altered the play of the fielder" and if the slide was not directly to base.

The primary difference to FED is the NCAA rules allow the runner to overslide the bag.
In NCAA, the slide toward the fielder must alter the play, with or without contact.

In FED, the slide toward the fielder is automatically illegal (at least by rule; how it's called might be different in some areas), whether it alters the play of the fielder or not, and with or without contact.

In my play, at least one of the options of it, there was no contact and no altering the play.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Illegal slide--FED rules Publius Baseball 21 Fri Apr 02, 2010 09:52am
NFHS Illegal Slide collinb Baseball 4 Mon Apr 19, 2004 09:56am
NFHS Illegal Slide collinb Softball 1 Sun Apr 18, 2004 07:43am
Head First Slide? Illegal? Gold_Spark Baseball 4 Tue Jul 30, 2002 01:28pm
illegal Slide? Gre144 Baseball 5 Fri Jul 05, 2002 11:21am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:24am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1