Please confirm - misc
 

Please confirm, or note any rule set which is otherwise:

1) Batted ball hits BR in batter box, then again out of box. Immediate dead ball on first hit.

2) ASA rules require avoidance effort by batter if HBP. Others (NHFS, PONY, USSSA) do not if completely in batters box.

3) Interference by runner passing fielder does not require contact.

4) Fielder at 1st must touch “white” base for putout of BR, regardless of why a BR.

Unless the play takes the fielder into foul territory. And that's about any play where they touch the orange (why else would they do it?).

Or, throw comes from foul territory (e.g. D3K).

Correct, but a timid fielder does not necessarily "draw" an interference call, either.

Yes, I should have mentioned the foul side. :o

Foul side of the 1b line :)

Sorry, Mr. Anal. :D

Had this come up in a game once! D3K, catcher makes throw from foul ground, but it was from the third base foul side. F3 set up on the orange bag.

Throw beat runner, I called safe, coach argued it was a legal play. He actually filed a protest over this...and lost.

So it is a valid distinction!

This was a very serious question when the double base and the parameters first hit the scene

The term the book uses is an errant throw (ASA). In that case, both the defense and offense may use either portion of the double base. Should the offense use the "wrong" base on a quality throw, the defense may appeal, provided the runner has not yet returned to the base.

If the defense uses the "wrong" base, is it obstruction?

In the cases where both teams may use both sides, if there is a NON-malicious crash at the base due to the possible confusion of the players, do we rule OBS or nothing?

This is the easy one. Being on or off the base has nothing to do with obstruction. Having the ball does. If F3 has the ball she can set on either bag and not be guilty of obstruction and if she doesn't, then she's guilty of obstruction regardless of which base she is on (if she impedes the runner).

I'm actually a little surprised my other 3 items were clear enough and sufficiently literal (anal); as I am often too cryptic as I was on #4. :)

Ok, not to hijack another of Cecil's threads, but indulge me here. This also feeds into my Part Two from the post above.

Routine infield grounder thrown to 1B. F3 sets up on either bag, and either does or does not yet have the ball. There is non-malicious contact at 1B as the BR touches the orange base. This gives us 4 scenarios.

F3 on white; does not have ball: Obstruction.
F3 on orange; does not have ball. Obstruction.
F3 on white; has ball: Out.
F3 on orange; has ball: ???? Nothing? Safe, yes, but anything else?

It is titled "misc"

My turn to be "anal". If impeded or hindered or :confused:

Still confirming:

6) Tie Breaker Rule - ASA or any
The book (5.11.B) says that if the runner to be placed on 2nd is the "out player" in a shorthanded situation, do not call an out but use the preceding player in the order.
That means the inning still starts with an out; as the "out player" is then the leadoff spot. The wording could mislead some.

If the leadoff batter happens to be the missing player, yes the inning would start with an out, but not if the missing player was the one to be placed at 2nd base. The rule is simply clarifying that if the tie breaker starts with the missing player being the one that is suppose to be placed on 2nd it is not an out, simply move to the preceeding player on the lineup and place them at 2nd.

Thinking thru your version, the missing spot would generate two outs; the last of the prior inning, plus the first of the new inning. That isn't the intent of this rule.

If the missing spot generates the third out in the prior inning, the following spot is leading off the tiebreaker inning. The runner is the preceding batter that is in the game, not to fail to have a runner.

I just indicate like any other "off the bag" play...

Given that the poster said the players collided ... I think "impeded or hindered" is a given.

I disagree, the wording is, IMO, quite straight forward and concise. You are making presumptions that are not stated or indicated in any manner in 5.11

My post was about when the shorthand out did not happen in the previous inning, should have clarified.
My point was to confirm that in the case of the "out player" starting an inning; the preceding player in the order goes to 2nd; which make the "out player" lead off the inning with an out. The words "do not call an out" can mislead some.


The wording seems intended for that situation and is clear for it.

Of course. That post was more about needling someone; but also because that is a rule often quoted incompletely. :rolleyes: