LL Rules - batted ball contacts runner

[legend]

It sounds like the Issue is with the interpretation of the word "passed" Imo the word would imply that it was/is a ball that a fielder had a play on but "booted" it. In the O.P. it sounds like there was no play available weather its poor timing or not, no play is no play. I guess (w/o seeing the play) that the p.u. could use his/her judgement to say that the pitcher should have made a play and that would justify voiding the b.r. being called out.

[Forest Ump]

It's really a matter of common sense. Why would you have that rule since theoretically every ball would pass the pitcher. Nobody would ever be out by his thinking.

[gotblue?]

Originally Posted by legend

It sounds like the Issue is with the interpretation of the word "passed" Imo the word would imply that it was/is a ball that a fielder had a play on but "booted" it. In the O.P. it sounds like there was no play available weather its poor timing or not, no play is no play. I guess (w/o seeing the play) that the p.u. could use his/her judgement to say that the pitcher should have made a play and that would justify voiding the b.r. being called out.

Except that the rule says that the runner is not out only if the ball passes an infielder with the runner immediately behind the fielder and no other infielder can make a play on the ball. For example, a ball hit between the 3B and SS, and the ball passes 3B and then hits the runner (R2 in this case). If the SS still can make a play on the ball, then the ball passing 3B and hitting the runner, the runner would still be out if it is judged that the SS still had a play on the ball.

Without having seen your play, it sounds like 2B still had a play on the ball, so the exemption for the runner would not apply, even if the pitcher is considered to be an infielder. R1 is out. No?

[CT1]

Why is this so hard to understand? The pitcher is not considered an infielder for the purposes of this rule. No judgment necessary.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by CT1

Why is this so hard to understand? The pitcher is not considered an infielder for the purposes of this rule. No judgment necessary.

Mybe a rules reference / cite would help.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by CT1

Why is this so hard to understand? The pitcher is not considered an infielder for the purposes of this rule. No judgment necessary.

I agree... and I can prove it in most rulesets. I'm having trouble proving it with just the LL book.

[CT1]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

I agree... and I can prove it in most rulesets. I'm having trouble proving it with just the LL book.

I haven't worked LL in a thousand years, so I don't have a book. When I did that level, they used modified OBR. If there was no modification, the OBR rule stood.

I can't imagine that LL rules would differ in this area, but I'm willing to be proved wrong.

[umpjim]

Rita posted the cite: 5.09(f) both in OBR and LLGB. Using the "did not pass rationalization" would not allow you to get an out in OBR on a base hit grounder between two infielders that passed them and hit a runner. No string theory in OBR. FED is different.

[Rita C]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

I agree... and I can prove it in most rulesets. I'm having trouble proving it with just the LL book.

I gave you the rules from the Little League book.

Rita

[bob jenkins]

Is LL 5.09(f) the same as OBR 5.09(f)?:

A fair ball touches a runner or an umpire on fair territory before it touches an
infielder including the pitcher, or touches an umpire before it has passed an infielder
other than the pitcher; runners advance, if forced.

If a fair ball goes through, or by, an infielder, no other infielder has a chance to
make a play on the ball and the ball touches a runner immediately behind the
infielder that the ball went through, or by, the ball is in play and the umpire shall
not declare the runner out. If a fair ball touches a runner after being deflected by an
infielder, the ball is in play and the umpire shall not declare the runner out;

Rule 5.09(f) Comment: If a fair ball touches an umpire working in the infield after it has
bounded past, or over, the pitcher, it is a dead ball. If a batted ball is deflected by a fielder in fair territory
and hits a runner or an umpire while still in flight and then caught by an infielder it shall not be a
catch, but the ball shall remain in play.

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Is LL 5.09(f) the same as OBR 5.09(f)?:

A fair ball touches a runner or an umpire on fair territory before it touches an
infielder including the pitcher, or touches an umpire before it has passed an infielder
other than the pitcher; runners advance, if forced.

If a fair ball goes through, or by, an infielder, no other infielder has a chance to
make a play on the ball and the ball touches a runner immediately behind the
infielder that the ball went through, or by, the ball is in play and the umpire shall
not declare the runner out. If a fair ball touches a runner after being deflected by an
infielder, the ball is in play and the umpire shall not declare the runner out;

Rule 5.09(f) Comment: If a fair ball touches an umpire working in the infield after it has
bounded past, or over, the pitcher, it is a dead ball. If a batted ball is deflected by a fielder in fair territory
and hits a runner or an umpire while still in flight and then caught by an infielder it shall not be a
catch, but the ball shall remain in play.

The LL rule has the exact same wording as the bolded part and the rest of the rule is similar except for editorial differences.

Upon further review it appears we have a problem.

Wendelstedt solves this problem by saying: "passes thru or by a fielder other than the pitcher" in their explanation of rule 7.09(k) even thought the rule does not have that exception.

I think we have to parse the rule: If the ball touches a fielder, the runner is protected. The pitcher is a fielder.
If the ball goes thru or by an infielder, the runner is protected except for the exception. The pitcher is not an infielder except where he is defined as one such as for the purpose of IFF.

But then we have the problem of the pitcher intentionally dropping a fly ball or line drive.