Collision at Safety Bag - ASA Rule

[davidrimi]

I've done a lot of research but found nothing on point.

Grounder to 1B. He runs across the double bag and steps on the safety bag and collided with the batter-runner. Batter-runner called out.

My thought was that since the 1B ran across and stepped on the safety bag instead of rounding and stepping on the inside bag, it caused an avoidable collision which is why the bag is there in the first place.

Or, alternatively, the 1B had no right to touch the safety bas since he wasn't pulled into the bag by an errant throw.

Your take?

[jmkupka]

If the fielder made any contact whatsoever with the white bag (99.9% orange, .1% white), we have an out.

[davidrimi]

Thanks for your prompt analysis.

So, The runner doesn't have a right to the bag? Especially when you have a collision?

In other words, the runner has a duty to slide or avoid. Doesn't the defensive player have the same obligation unless he's being pulled into the resulting collision by an errant throw?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by davidrimi

So, The runner doesn't have a right to the bag? Especially when you have a collision?

What is this "right to the bag" you're referring to? Which rule do you think would apply here?

In other words, the runner has a duty to slide or avoid.

Is this in the duties section of the rulebook? Again ... what rule do you think says this?

Doesn't the defensive player have the same obligation unless he's being pulled into the resulting collision by an errant throw?

And this from the Obligations section of the rulebook? Huh?!?!?

Are you looking at Softball rules or Calvinball rules?

[EsqUmp]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

What is this "right to the bag" you're referring to? Which rule do you think would apply here?

Is this in the duties section of the rulebook? Again ... what rule do you think says this? And this from the Obligations section of the rulebook? Huh?!?!?

Are you looking at Softball rules or Calvinball rules?

You're being narrow minded at best. The "duties" and "obligations" are what the rules are designed for. That is, to protect a particular player by allowing penalties.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

You're being narrow minded at best. The "duties" and "obligations" are what the rules are designed for. That is, to protect a particular player by allowing penalties.

I disagree that I'm being narrow minded. There's no such thing as ANY of the things the OP was referring to. And I know you know that. There's no "right to the bag". There's no "duty to slide or avoid" required of a live runner. There's no "same obligation" on the fielder (not even sure what he's implying here --- that the fielder also must slide or avoid?).

My point was ... where are any of the things he's implying listed in the rulebook?

[EsqUmp]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

I disagree that I'm being narrow minded. There's no such thing as ANY of the things the OP was referring to. And I know you know that. There's no "right to the bag". There's no "duty to slide or avoid" required of a live runner. There's no "same obligation" on the fielder (not even sure what he's implying here --- that the fielder also must slide or avoid?).

My point was ... where are any of the things he's implying listed in the rulebook?

The obligations and duties are covered by rules such as interference, crash rule, obstruction and double first base. My point is the a rule doesn't have to be labeled as such. The rule and penalty speaks for itself.

This is a general statement irrespective of the specifics of the post.

[MD Longhorn]

So ... you didn't like the way I replied. OK. The fact that I was rather sarcastic when I referred to his non-existent rules must have come from non-existent sections of the book has no bearing on the fact that those rules fail to exist.

My point... again... is that none of what he's saying is in the book. Not one drop. None of the rules you mention apply to this situation. Assuming the fielder touched a part of first base, all we have is an out. No interference. No obstruction. No violation of the double base rules. And there's no such thing as a crash rule.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by davidrimi

I've done a lot of research but found nothing on point.

Grounder to 1B. He runs across the double bag and steps on the safety bag and collided with the batter-runner. Batter-runner called out.

This is correct only if F3 touched any portion of the white base.

My thought was that since the 1B ran across and stepped on the safety bag instead of rounding and stepping on the inside bag, it caused an avoidable collision which is why the bag is there in the first place.

There is no rule supporting any action on the umpire's behalf unless s/he can determine one of the two players involved took some action to cause the collision.

Or, alternatively, the 1B had no right to touch the safety bas since he wasn't pulled into the bag by an errant throw.

Your take?

Again, nothing to address here other than you are correct, that this type of base was initiated for the purpose of avoiding collisions.

OTOH, if people were taught how to play the position properly and the umpires would have the nerve to toss BRs who unnecessarily stepped on a defender's foot/ankle/heel, there would be no need for the base.

Unfortunately, when special equipment/rules are put in place, the game isn't the only thing being dummied down.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

This is correct only if F3 touched any portion of the white base....

or tagged the BR.

[Big Slick]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

And there's no such thing as a crash rule.

ASA 8 - 7 - Q

When a defensive player has the ball and the runner remains upright and crashes into the defensive player.

Not applicable in this situation, but there is a rule.

[BretMan]

Originally Posted by davidrimi

I've done a lot of research but found nothing on point.

Grounder to 1B. He runs across the double bag and steps on the safety bag and collided with the batter-runner. Batter-runner called out.

My thought was that since the 1B ran across and stepped on the safety bag instead of rounding and stepping on the inside bag, it caused an avoidable collision which is why the bag is there in the first place.

Or, alternatively, the 1B had no right to touch the safety bas since he wasn't pulled into the bag by an errant throw.

Your take?

Shopping around for a second opinion, eh?

You'll get the same answer here that you got on the other forum...

[davidrimi]

Thanks to all who replied. It is funny how sarcastic people can be or just trolling. No social skills, I say.

I merely asked a question that I thought a rule may have applied. I know that if the runner does not touch the safety bag, the defense can appeal the play for an out.

I merely thought that it may work both ways. The safety bag is there for a reason. I would imagine it's to protect the 1B. But he/she can run across the bag causing a collision without repercussions? No protections for the runner?

Apparently not!

[Altor]

Your complaint is with the rules writers, not with those who enforce the rules.

[BretMan]

Originally Posted by davidrimi

Thanks to all who replied. It is funny how sarcastic people can be or just trolling. No social skills, I say.

I merely asked a question that I thought a rule may have applied. I know that if the runner does not touch the safety bag, the defense can appeal the play for an out.

I merely thought that it may work both ways. The safety bag is there for a reason. I would imagine it's to protect the 1B. But he/she can run across the bag causing a collision without repercussions? No protections for the runner?

Apparently not!

It's the nature of the game, especially arround bases, that there will be times when two players will be hustling to occupy the same spot on the field. It's inevitable that sometimes they will contact each other.

The double first base was designed to reduce collisions. It's an unrealistic expectation to think that it would eliminate them.

There are all sorts of amendments and exceptions to the double base rule- the rule itself is almost an entire page long in the rule book! Most of the exceptions cover the typical plays you see at first base, with a fielder standing at the base waiting to receive a throw and a runner trying to get there as fast as he can. The rule will cover most situations at first base, but it's never going to cover all of them.

It just so happens that the play you asked about isn't covered by any special exception or amendment. It's just two players hustling to reach a single point on the field. In that respect, it's really no different than a play that could happen at any other base- they might bump into each other.