Illegal Slide?
 

FED and NCAA only:

R1. Grounder to short. Throws wildly to second. F4 defelcts the ball and it rolls toward the umpire's B position. After the ball is deflected, R1 slides to the inside of the base and (a) does or (b) does not make contact with F4.

Ruling?

The FED FPSR requires the runner to slide directly into and not past the base. If you judge that the slide is directly into the base (not sure what "the inside of the base" means), then the contact is legal. The fielder has no other protection on a thrown ball.

I don't do NCAA.

Is there a force play happening at 2nd base? You state AFTER the ball is deflected (assumes that it is rolling on the ground), R1 slides into second. Please clarify, is there a play being made on the sliding runner?

For sake of argument, I will assume that R1 is sliding into 2nd. The deflection part is irrelevant. As mentioned, a slide, to be legal, must be in direct line with the base. Contact can't be made behind the base or away from the base. If the slide is legal, then I can't have a violation of the FPSR in A or B. There can be legal contact.

Bolded is FED only. Not illegal in NCAA and OBR.

As others have stated, your description leaves a lot out however, sometimes players just doesn't know how to play a position properly and coaches and fans want the umpire to compensate by calling something, when it is just sloppy play. Was F4 playing on the wrong side of the bag and there was contact.? Did he cross the bag to go after the ball? All these things have to be taking into consideration.

Correct, I should have stated my views are related to FED only.

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?

Ah, now I understand the question: do we have to have hindrance to call FPSR violation/interference?

The standard for FPSR is "make contact or alter the play," so I would say, since it says "OR," that contact is sufficient for the violation. Since the violation is treated as INT, you can have a penalty for INT even without hindrance.

Another way to get there: FPSR is a safety rule, and with safety rules we err on the side of caution. Even if F6 never threw the ball, the runner has violated the rule and brought the penalty on himself.

So you're getting two outs with contact, and no outs without contact? (Just trying to clarify).

(And, remember, F4 didn't have the ball at the time of the slide -- it was well away from him and he hadn't even started to chase it.)

F4 didn't have the ball, then I don't have a FPSR, there was no play being made. I could have malicious contact, possibly, maybe. More than likely I have nothing.

Bob, this is wrong twice.

First, there WAS a play being made: F6 threw the ball to F4. True, F4 booted the throw, but that doesn't mean there was no play at 2B (but see below).

Second, a play is NOT required by the rule:

"Any runner is out who...
...does not legally slide and causes illegal contact and/or illegally alters the
actions of a fielder in the immediate act of making a play, or on a force play,
does not slide in a direct line between the bases;" (8-4-2b)

Notice 2 different ways to violate the rule: (a) illegal slide that causes illegal contact or alters the play, OR (b) not sliding directly into the base on a force play. Violating (b) is enough to violate the rule; the OP, as I read it, involves violating both (a) and (b), since there is in fact a play being made at 2B.

The only way you DON'T call an FPSR violation here is if you rule that F4 was contacted AFTER, and not in the "immediate act of," making a play. You'd also have to rule that the slide and contact were not part of a force play at the base. That's umpire judgment, of course: if it's bang-bang, I'm still getting 2 outs on this for the runner's violation. The runner when he slid into the fielder didn't know he'd boot it.

Again, for me, this is a safety rule, and any benefit of the doubt goes to the defense. "Coach, if you don't want that call have your runners slide directly into the base."

The rule you quoted uses the word "play" but you say no play is required. Does Not Compute!

I would contend that once F4 booted the ball there is no longer a play being made. I'm not quite sure because I can't find a FED definition of "play" but in OBR it's a legitimate attempt to retire a runner which you can't do in this case without the ball.

What is the definition of a "play" ? If the alleged FPSR violation is occurring while F4 is chasing the deflected ball, how can you have a force play?

Let's add another hypothetical situation for argument sake. Let's say the grounder went to F5 instead. R1 gets a great jump and because of that, F5 chooses to throw to 1b to get the sure out. R1 over slides 2b and makes contact with F4 standing behind 2nd base. What do you have?

You cite that the slide occurs after the fielder has booted the ball and it has rolled away. I have a hard time protecting a fielder if the slide is otherwise legal - i.e. in compliance with 2-32. The immediate act of making a play is over. The force play mention in 8-4-2 is moot since the ball was misplayed and the runner is legally sliding. You cannot have a force play without the ball. The runner may be guilty of MC depending on the contact though. You have to ask yourself, did he do it to prevent the fielder from recovering the ball and possibly making a play on the B/R? If so, enforce your FPSR. Based on what was in the OP, we probably have just a defensive mistake and a legal slide though.

The NCAA rule book has a great diagram showing where a runner can slide legally. I hope that the NFHS includes it in next year's update.

I don't think the FPSR is the proper call for the OP.

I would damn sure ring R1 up for an illegal slide since the throw came from F6, and R1 was sliding to the inside. In this situation, R1 should have been going straight to the base, or to the outfield side.

OK. I agree about "force play," but if F4 is still close enough to the base to be contacted by the runner near the base, I'm ruling an FPSR violation. Again, the runner didn't know the play would end when he chose to slide illegally.

If he has moved away from the base and is chasing the ball, that would not be an FPSR violation.

If the badly thrown ball has been deflected by fielder toward umpire at B position, well before the contact there is no longer a play, thus no interferference possible, thus no FPSR violation.

If he slid inside to avoid F4 on other side and due to bad throw F4 is drawn inside, but contact is after the deflection then where is the interference?

However, the rule does specifically mention a "force play", and that is defined: A force play situation is in effect from the moment the batter becomes a runner, and is not ended until the runner is put out, reaches his advance base, or a trailing runner is put out. A force play does not need a ball or a play. In the OP, the runner is not sliding on a direct line to the base, nor sliding/running away from the fielder. By rule, this is a FPSR violation.

Now, I admit that getting two outs here seems a little over the top, but that's what the rule requires, in both FED and NCAA.

Dave, please reference a case book play, or rule reference. I respectfully disagree with your interpretation. As I see it, no ball, no play, no FPSR. Yes, there is a force situation, but there can be no interference.

If I don't have this right I'll get remedial training (RTFM). But, in calling FPSR INT at 2B, which would usually be called by the PU, you would see a slide not directly at 2B and not away from the fielder. You would not look at anything else and call the violation right away. Somewhere, FED says it wants this called even it doesn't disrupt the play or (I'm guessing here) there is not a play. It's a safety issue.
While I know this I have not always applied it. That's why the coaches play the odds.

Note this caseplay references an attempt and does not go any further:

Rule: 2.32.2



2.32.2 SITUATION B

R1 is on third base and R2 is on first base with no outs. A ground ball is hit to F6, who throws to F4 at second base. R2 slides out of the base path in an attempt to prevent F4 from turning the double play.

RULING: Since R2 did not slide directly into second base, R2 is declared out, as well as the batter-runner. R1 returns to third base, the base occupied at the time of the pitch.

Here is where the OP situation differs from the case book definition of FPSR. You would have a very hard time selling calling a double play on the OP.

Read it real fast
 

FED 8.4.2c. does not legally attempt to avoid a fielder in the immediate act of making a play on him, or

PENALTY: The runner is out, the ball remains live unless interference is called.

Umpire may rule that the runner is out by sliding into F4 near the bag if he believes the runner has abandoned effort to reach base safely and is trying to protect advance of teammate.

HTBT, but if no other possible play in progress, I have nothing here.

Well, because the NCAA rules state this very clearly, I'll post that, bolding the sections that I think are responsive to your interpretation.

Force-Play-Slide Rule
SECTION 4. The intent of the force-play-slide rule is to ensure the safety of all players. This is a safety and an interference rule. Whether the defense could have completed the double play has no bearing on the applicability of this rule. This rule pertains to a force-play situation at any base, regardless of the number of outs.
a. On any force play, the runner must slide on the ground before the base and in a direct line between the two bases. It is permissible for the slider’s momentum to carry him through the base in the baseline extended (see diagram).
Exception—A runner need not slide directly into a base as long as the runner slides or runs in a direction away from the fielder to avoid making contact or altering the play of the fielder. Interference shall not be called.
(1) “On the ground” means either a head-first slide or a slide with one leg and buttock on the ground before the base.
(2) “Directly into a base” means the runner’s entire body (feet, legs, trunk and arms) must stay in a straight line between the bases.
b. Contact with a fielder is legal and interference shall not be called if the runner makes a legal slide directly to the base and in the baseline extended (see diagram).
A.R.—If contact occurs on top of the base as a result of a “pop-up” slide, this contact is legal.
c. Actions by a runner are illegal and interference shall be called if:
(1) The runner slides or runs out of the base line in the direction of the fielder and alters the play of a fielder (with or without contact);
(2) The runner uses a rolling or cross-body slide and either makes contact with or alters the play of a fielder;
(3) The runner’s raised leg makes contact higher than the fielder’s knee when in a standing position;
(4) The runner slashes or kicks the fielder with either leg; or
(5) The runner illegally slides toward or contacts the fielder even if the fielder makes no attempt to throw to complete a play.
PENALTY for 1-5—(1) With less than two outs, the batter-runner, as well as the interfering runner, shall be declared out and no other runner(s) shall advance.
(2) With two outs, the interfering runner shall be declared out and no other runner(s) shall advance.
(3) If the runner’s slide or collision is flagrant, the runner shall be ejected from the contest.

Note particularly the first paragraph which says this rule is intended to ensure safety. Therefore, actual interference is not required, nor is the possibility of a double play.
Also, c(1) seems to me to cover specifically the situation of the OP. "The play of a fielder" is more general than "play on a runner".

I would have a hard time and I don't think I would have called it but you wanted a caseplay and I found it. Truly, in the OP, what I think FED wants and won't get, is you see the illegal slide at the fielder and point and say "time, that's interference." You don't even have to see what the fielder does afterward. Doesn't happen in the real world.

Dave, I hate to belabor this but you aren't making your case. The statement you cite, (1) The runner slides or runs out of the base line in the direction of the fielder and alters the play of a fielder (with or without contact) can't be used to support the OP because there we no altering of a play. The illegal slide did not cause the deflection, it would have occurred absent the slide.

OK, evidently you think that the "play of a fielder" has to mean that the fielder is playing on a runner. I don't agree.

Now, what about the rest? Still think there has to be interference to enforce this rule? (see first and bolded paragraph,)
Still think that it's OK for a runner to slide into a fielder who is away from the bag? (see 4a.)
If you still think either of those, then I submit that you aren't actually reading the rule, and ignoring the point of the rule as well.

Just like I told one coach when he ran out to discuss the call, I get, "Did he alter the play? Did he make contact?"

I replied, "No, but it's not because he didn't try his damnedest to! Would you rather he hurt somebody next time?"

It's probably one of the most misunderstood, and misapplied rules by players, coaches, and umpires. I've seen games where I definitely would have called it, not be called, and vice versa.

I simply tell them go straight at the base. Don't contact a fielder on the other side of the base. You don't have to slide, but if you don't, don't interfere with throw, and when you know you are out for sure, run away from the throw.

That's about as basic as you can get it without interference being called most of the time depending on the umpire.

You appear to be assuming things not in evidence. There is nothing illegal about sliding to the inside of the bag. You cannot pretend that the runner didn't know that the play would end but absolve the fielder of the culpability here.

For NFHS ball, a runner who slides to the inside of the bag is not doing anything illegal. There are other events that must transpire for it to be so. The OP did not offer any.

Really? You said that?

In the OP, the runner did not interfere with the throw. The fielder deflected it - the play involves defensive error.

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?

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.

Obstruction.

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.

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.

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.

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.

You are on crack.

Yeah, change the Chore Boy too while you're at it! :eek:

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.

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.

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.

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.