Whats you call ASA, NFHS and NCAA
 

R1 on 2nd B2 at bat. Pitcher throws an Illegal pitch that the batter tries to hold up on but hits it towards SS R1 Maliciously runs over the SS fielding the ball.

Whats your call and what rules do you use to support your call?

After consulting with MTD, Jr., here are your rulings.


ASA: The Illegal Pitch (IP) is a Delayed Dead Ball (DDB). R1's Crash against F6 is Interference. R2's Crash/Interference causes the Ball to become Dead immediately. R1 is out because of the Interference and is ejected because of the Crash, and B2 is awarded 1B on a Fielder's Choice. But since F1's IP to B2 is a DDB, and R1 did not advance at least one base, the Offense has the option of taking the IP Penalty which is R1 is ejected, R1's out is recinded, R1's substitute is placed on 2B, and a Ball is awarded to B2.

NFHS and NCAA: The ruling is the same as ASA with one exception. If the Offense takes the IP Penalty, R1's substitute is awarded 3B.

MTD, Sr.

Nfhs case play 8-6-14 sit b indicates the malicious contact takes precedence and the runner would still be out regardless. Both the illegal pitch and the malicious contact penalties would be enforced.

R1 is out & ejected.

If the SS makes the play anyway and gets B2 out; then
- B2 gets a ball in the count and finishes batting
- the R1 out is removed, but a sub is needed to run for R1 at 2nd, then awarded 3rd.

If B2 is safe, B2 stays safe, and a sub is needed to run for R1 at 2nd, then awarded 3rd.

No guarantee for NCAA, but whatever rules I am working.

This is not the ASA's definition of a "crash," which is defined (described) in rule 8-7-Q and Rule supplement #13: the requirement for a crash is the defensive player has to have (possession) of the ball.

You may still choose to eject, but not because of a "crash."

\
There is no R2 and no second "crash". The eject/DQ is for "maliciously".

If the IP Penalty is applied, the R1 sub is awarded 3rd.

You are allowing continuing play after blatant and malicious interference? How do you support that?

I don't care which ruleset (and believe there is more to be said to each), but the DDB on the IP has to end when the runner commits interference.

As to the rest, here's some thoughts to consider with each ruleset.

Does/should the option to enforce the IP rather than the result of the play erase a malicious act along with the rest of the play?

Does interference supercede an IP (like it does obstruction)?

Why are you placing R1's sub back on 2nd?? With an accepted IP, isn't that runner awarded a base in ASA, just as in NFHS and NCAA??

OK, correct, IMMEDIATE DB for INT, no continuing play.
I should have stayed with face value and not try to overthink.

That means B2 can't be safe and B2 would get a ball in the count and finishes batting if IP penalty stays. But, the INT penalty awards B2 1st base, so the IP is ignored.

To ignore the IP the BR and all other runners must advance at least one base safely. R1 did not advance safely so the coach would still get the choice of the play or the penalty of IP.

Fed*8.6.14 SITUATION B:

With R1 on second base and R2 on first base, F1 throws an illegal pitch; B3 hits ground ball to F4 who is attempting to field the ball. R2 maliciously contacts F4.

RULING: Interference does not supersede illegal pitch. Umpire(s) signal delayed dead ball for illegal pitch and then immediate dead ball for the malicious contact. R2 is out for malicious contact. The offense’s team coach is given the option of the result of the play or the penalty for the illegal pitch. If the coach selects the result of the play, R1 is returned to second, R2 is out and B3 is awarded first base. If the coach selects the penalty for the illegal pitch, R1 is awarded third base, R2 is out for malicious contact, B3 is returned to the plate, awarded a ball and if the ball is ball four, is awarded first base.

COMMENT: Because malicious contact will always supersede any other illegal action, both malicious contact and illegal pitch penalties are enforced in this situation. (5-1-1e; 8-6-10)

If you have a citation that makes that notation, I'd love to see it

Mark, Jr., and I talked about that. There is no term "malicious contact" in the ASA Rules Book but it does use the word "crash". We did not want to use a term that was not in the ASA Rules Book. We think that we could use the "unsportsmanlike conduct" or something to the effect. But I think that we all will agree that the penalty for R1's egregious contact is ejection.



ASA Rules are not quite the same as the NFHS and NCAA Rules. What I wrote is correct. ASA: R1's substitute returns to 2B; NFHS and NCAA: R2's substitute is awarded 3B.



Mark, Jr., and I do not believe that the Comment in the NFHS Casebook Play cannot be supported by rule. Per NFHS Rules, Malicious Contact only supersedes Obstruction, but that is a discussion to have with the NFHS Softball Rules Committee.

MTD, Sr.

Don't have one, simply addressing the elephant in the room.

So, please cite the exact ASA rule on which you (and MTD, Jr, apparently) rely for that statement. Every rule I see in each of these rules sets states the penalty for an IP is a ball on the batter AND a one base award from TOP for all runners.

We bad! I was typing and Mark, Jr., was reading the ASA Rules Book and I didn't hear him correctly (my hearing is bad as my eyesight, :p).

I am going to bed now and will go back and re-edit my original post in the morning.

MTD, Sr.

Why would it need to be taken up with the NFHS rules committee? There is a case play that covers the exact situation and in NFHS the runner is not awarded 3rd, they are out. Malicious contact in NFHS is always an out if committed by an offensive player, and an ejection by any player who commits malicious contact.

Because this is a case of the casebook rewriting the book. The rule book does not support the case play. If the caseplay is what they really do want, they need to edit the rule book.

And, as far as I know, we always give precedence to the rules over the cases, supplements, POE, etc.

Every situation cannot be covered in the rule book, that is why there are case plays and clarifications published. And since when do we ever rule different of what a published case play states, regardless of what we feel the rule book justifies?

Did you post that for this?
"Play: R1 on 2B, R2 on 1B, 2 outs and B5 at Bat with no count. F1 delivers an illegal pitch. B5 hits a ground ball to F6. As F-6 is attempting to make a play on the batted ball, R1 lowers their shoulder and plows into F-6, driving them to the ground. The umpires call time and interference and call R1 out and since this is the third out end the ½ inning."

Quote:

(All Adult Slow Pitch except Seniors) Any eligible player on the official line-up including available substitutes may be used as a courtesy runner. A courtesy runner may be used once per inning.

You would think they would have learned after the "inning ending home run" wording fiasco