The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Baseball (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/)
-   -   I Missed This Question .... (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/97298-i-missed-question.html)

Spence Sun Feb 16, 2014 10:41pm

I Missed This Question ....
 
I missed the following question on a test:

With a runner on third (R3) a batter hits a ball that drifts over foul territory. The third baseman is accidentally prevented by the runner R3 from catching the ball.



What's the call?

Answer was that the batter is out. I'm struggling to wrap my brain around that answer.

Does the "accidental" aspect play into the ruling at all?

Does fair/foul have an impact on who is out?

Tell me what questions I'm not asking myself.

Matt Sun Feb 16, 2014 10:56pm

What rules? Who prevented him?

Spence Sun Feb 16, 2014 11:03pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt (Post 923185)
What rules? Who prevented him?

Sorry. Fixed it. Runner on 3rd prevented F5 from catching the fly ball that was over foul territory.

Matt Sun Feb 16, 2014 11:15pm

Where was the out possible?

cookie Mon Feb 17, 2014 08:04am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spence (Post 923182)
I missed the following question on a test:

With a runner on third (R3) a batter hits a ball that drifts over foul territory. The third baseman is accidentally prevented by the runner R3 from catching the ball.



What's the call?

Answer was that the batter is out. I'm struggling to wrap my brain around that answer.

Does the "accidental" aspect play into the ruling at all?

Does fair/foul have an impact on who is out?

Tell me what questions I'm not asking myself.


Are you reading the question (Fed Test) correctly? There are two different questions on the test, one right after the other with almost the exact same wording. One has the 3rd base coach "accidentally" interfering with a foul fly ball catch; the other has the runner at 3rd "accidentally" interfering with a foul fly catch. Both of them are "outs," though two different players are declared out.

Read Rule 7-4-1(f), then Casebook plays 7.4.1(H) and 8.4.2(B)

Spence Mon Feb 17, 2014 08:37am

Quote:

Originally Posted by cookie (Post 923226)
Are you reading the question (Fed Test) correctly? There are two different questions on the test, one right after the other with almost the exact same wording. One has the 3rd base coach "accidentally" interfering with a foul fly ball catch; the other has the runner at 3rd "accidentally" interfering with a foul fly catch. Both of them are "outs," though two different players are declared out.

Read Rule 7-4-1(f), then Casebook plays 7.4.1(H) and 8.4.2(B)


28) With a runner on third, the batter hits a high pop fly that drifts over foul territory. The third baseman is accidentally prevented from catching the ball by the runner at third base.
1. Foul ball. YOUR ANSWER
2. The runner at third is out.
3. The batter is out.
4. The coach is restricted to the bench and the coaching box must remain unoccupied.
Reference: 8-4-2g



I copied the question and the answer I got back. I see why my answer was wrong. I just can't figure out why the batter is out. You can't see it from what I copied but they have a mark next to both my answer and the correct answer. They have 3 as the correct answer.

Spence Mon Feb 17, 2014 08:39am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt (Post 923190)
Where was the out possible?

The batter.

However, 8.4.2 Sit B in the current casebook has the exact same play and it has the runner on third being declared out.

bob jenkins Mon Feb 17, 2014 09:02am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spence (Post 923230)
The batter.

However, 8.4.2 Sit B in the current casebook has the exact same play and it has the runner on third being declared out.

This FED rule was changed a few years ago. It used to be that the batter was out. Now it's the runner who is out. Someone just forgto to change the answer key.

I think I have heard that this question has been acknowledged by FED (or some state(s) ) to be incorrect.

johnnyg08 Mon Feb 17, 2014 09:15am

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 923231)
This FED rule was changed a few years ago. It used to be that the batter was out. Now it's the runner who is out. Someone just forgto to change the answer key.

I think I have heard that this question has been acknowledged by FED (or some state(s) ) to be incorrect.


I don't remember, but does it matter how many outs are remaining?

I feel like I remember reading at some point that w/ two outs we get the batter, w/ < 2 out we get the runner.

bob jenkins Mon Feb 17, 2014 09:28am

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnnyg08 (Post 923233)
I don't remember, but does it matter how many outs are remaining?

I feel like I remember reading at some point that w/ two outs we get the batter, w/ < 2 out we get the runner.

Not on this play.

Forest Ump Mon Feb 17, 2014 11:52am

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnnyg08 (Post 923233)
I feel like I remember reading at some point that w/ two outs we get the batter, w/ < 2 out we get the runner.

You're thinking of batters interference with a runner coming home.

johnnyg08 Mon Feb 17, 2014 01:00pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Forest Ump (Post 923257)
You're thinking of batters interference with a runner coming home.

Gotcha

CT1 Mon Feb 17, 2014 01:07pm

R3 (the player who interfered) is out. Don't forget to add a strike to the count if there were less than 2 strikes already.

dash_riprock Mon Feb 17, 2014 11:24pm

If the ball was fair, I think the batter would get 1st.

bwburke94 Mon Feb 17, 2014 11:44pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by dash_riprock (Post 923385)
If the ball was fair, I think the batter would get 1st.

Correct, but it was a foul ball so it's irrelevant here.

JJ Tue Feb 18, 2014 10:19am

Quote:

Originally Posted by dash_riprock (Post 923385)
If the ball was fair, I think the batter would get 1st.

OK, another related question. What if that runner bumps the 3rd baseman and then he catches the pop foul anyway? Only one out, or two?

JJ

dash_riprock Tue Feb 18, 2014 11:42am

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJ (Post 923432)
OK, another related question. What if that runner bumps the 3rd baseman and then he catches the pop foul anyway? Only one out, or two?

JJ

The ball is dead on the INT.

MD Longhorn Tue Feb 18, 2014 01:12pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt (Post 923190)
Where was the out possible?

Generally in baseball, when a batter hits a fly ball that's caught, it creates an out on the batter.

dash_riprock Tue Feb 18, 2014 03:25pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn (Post 923470)
Generally in baseball, when a batter hits a fly ball that's caught, it creates an out on the batter.

Not in this case.

MD Longhorn Tue Feb 18, 2014 04:16pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by dash_riprock (Post 923490)
Not in this case.

Really? Before the INT, there was no out to be had on the batter if the ball had been caught? Why, praytell?

rbmartin Tue Feb 18, 2014 08:19pm

Rule 5-1-1e
Ball becomes dead immediately when there is interference by a runner, batter-runner, or a retired runner, the batter , or any person.

Rule 8-4-2g .....If , in the judgment of the umpire, the runner including the batter runner interferes in any way and prevents a double play anywhere, two shall be declared out...

MD Longhorn Wed Feb 19, 2014 08:54am

Quote:

Originally Posted by rbmartin (Post 923522)
Rule 5-1-1e
Ball becomes dead immediately when there is interference by a runner, batter-runner, or a retired runner, the batter , or any person.

Rule 8-4-2g .....If , in the judgment of the umpire, the runner including the batter runner interferes in any way and prevents a double play anywhere, two shall be declared out...

To whom/what was this a response?

rbmartin Wed Feb 19, 2014 12:29pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn (Post 923546)
To whom/what was this a response?

I was pointing out that in the scenario described in the OP, depending on if additional runners were on base and their actions, the umpire could conceivably award 2 outs on the play described.
For instance if a runner was on 1st and was running on the pitch. If the umpire feels he would have been a dead duck on the appeal play, based on Rule 8-4-2g he could call him out as well. All I am saying is that just because the ball is immediately dead and the runner is out, there are other things to consider on this play.

MD Longhorn Wed Feb 19, 2014 03:05pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by rbmartin (Post 923585)
I was pointing out that in the scenario described in the OP, depending on if additional runners were on base and their actions, the umpire could conceivably award 2 outs on the play described.
For instance if a runner was on 1st and was running on the pitch. If the umpire feels he would have been a dead duck on the appeal play, based on Rule 8-4-2g he could call him out as well. All I am saying is that just because the ball is immediately dead and the runner is out, there are other things to consider on this play.

Gotcha. Thanks.

johnnyg08 Thu Feb 20, 2014 06:57pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by rbmartin (Post 923522)
Rule 5-1-1e
Ball becomes dead immediately when there is interference by a runner, batter-runner, or a retired runner, the batter , or any person.

Be careful with this, in the instance of a potential infield fly, we have to determine if the ball if fair/foul on an infield fly hit down the line. OBR

JJ Thu Aug 14, 2014 10:35am

In NCAA and MLB, if that interference is INTENTIONAL, both the runner AND the batter are declared out. Sort of what the FED rule says "if the interference prevents a double play"...but the majority of the time only the runner is out, and if it's a foul ball a strike is added to the count (if the batter has less than two strikes).

JJ


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:13am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1