What's the call?

[BlueDevilRef]

Base hit with runner at third. One out. Ball comes home on relay throw. Catcher misses throw and it rebounds toward on deck batter who is about 8 ft past plate giving direction to runner attempting to score. Ball hits on deck batter and stops there. Catcher picks it up as another runner scores.

Your call as plate umpire? Rule cite please

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BlueDevilRef

Base hit with runner at third. One out. Ball comes home on relay throw. Catcher misses throw and it rebounds toward on deck batter who is about 8 ft past plate giving direction to runner attempting to score. Ball hits on deck batter and stops there. Catcher picks it up as another runner scores.

Your call as plate umpire? Rule cite please

Either the Catcher should have caught the relay throw or the IF who made the relay throw should have made a better relay throw.

MTD, Sr.

[Umpire@1]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Either the Catcher should have caught the relay throw or the IF who made the relay throw should have made a better relay throw.

MTD, Sr.

Well that was pretty obvious.

[josephrt1]

Originally Posted by BlueDevilRef

Base hit with runner at third. One out. Ball comes home on relay throw. Catcher misses throw and it rebounds toward on deck batter who is about 8 ft past plate giving direction to runner attempting to score. Ball hits on deck batter and stops there. Catcher picks it up as another runner scores.

Your call as plate umpire? Rule cite please

I think its complex and you had ot be there but;

1. the rule is 7.1.D
"The on-deck batter may not interfere with a defensive player’s opportunity to make an out.
Effect:
1. The ball is dead.
2. If it involves a runner, the runner closest to home plate at the time of the interference shall be declared out.

2. The rule says interferes with a defensive players opportunity to make an out. I wouldn't know that unless i was there. Interference is a judgement call. I most likely have a dead ball because it hit a player who should have gotten out of the way. But could the catcher have made an out? Depends on where the runner was, was anyone covering the plate, could the catcher have gotten the ball if it didn't hit the on-deck batter.

If i don't think she (the catcher) could have made an out, i have a dead ball (blocked ball) and put runners back. (8.5.G.exception#3). If I think she might have gotten an out, runner closest to home would be out.

That's my 2 pennies worth.

[Umpire@1]

Originally Posted by josephrt1

I think its complex and you had ot be there but;

1. the rule is 7.1.D
"The on-deck batter may not interfere with a defensive player’s opportunity to make an out.
Effect:
1. The ball is dead.
2. If it involves a runner, the runner closest to home plate at the time of the interference shall be declared out.

2. The rule says interferes with a defensive players opportunity to make an out. I wouldn't know that unless i was there. Interference is a judgement call. I most likely have a dead ball because it hit a player who should have gotten out of the way. But could the catcher have made an out? Depends on where the runner was, was anyone covering the plate, could the catcher have gotten the ball if it didn't hit the on-deck batter.

If i don't think she could have made an out, i have a dead ball and put runners back. (8.5.G.exception#3). If I think she might have gotten an out, runner closest to home would be out.

That's my 2 pennies worth.

2 pennies well spent!! I am with you on it.

[BlueDevilRef]

Thanks for replies. I will pay some book time with those rules cited.

In this game, which ended 11-1 in 5, the play wasn't a big deal. But, always gotta make sure to get it right for the game when the run does matter or is the winning run etc.

I know not a lot of guys have not answered. I'm curious to see if anyone has anything else.

My call was the same as MTD by the way. On deck batter didn't interfere, ball hit her in leg and stopped. If anything, it helped the defense (I know that doesn't matter by rule) but regardless, we played on.

[IRISHMAFIA]

ODB's primary concern is to avoid affecting any play. Regardless of whether the ODB interfered with a possible play, IMO it is still a blocked ball.

[BlueDevilRef]

Rule in nfhs is 7-5-4-1. This rule says if no play is obvious, doesn't mention making an out. In my play, no play was obvious, however, should have placed runners back to bases at time of interference.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Playing devil's advocate here, are we all sure there is a call to be made??

To be interference, there must be a play that is interfered with. The person involved says there was no play.

To be a blocked ball (thus dead), the ball must be handled by someone not in the game, or touch offensive equipment left on the field, or similar. The on deck batter IS permitted on the field, WAS doing an approved function, and an errant throw hits him. How is this different than an errant throw hitting a base coach; the ball remains live when that happens, UNLESS the coach fails the same charge, to not interfere??

Based on the description of the play, and if I were in agreement on the field, the ball hitting the on-deck batter likely was advantageous to the defense. I submit that I could certainly accept a "no call", and ball remaining live, as an acceptable ruling based on those judgments.

[jmkupka]

not trying to add a "what if" scenario...
but it is likely that, in an effort to avoid getting hit by an errant throw, the ODB could ricochet the ball well away from a defender, in itself causing an advance in base(s). That could justify dead ball, runners return, while not necessarily being INT, no?

[DaveASA/FED]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

not trying to add a "what if" scenario...
but it is likely that, in an effort to avoid getting hit by an errant throw, the ODB could ricochet the ball well away from a defender, in itself causing an advance in base(s). That could justify dead ball, runners return, while not necessarily being INT, no?

Of course! That is what everyone has been saying, this play is a HTBT type of play. As described, ball gets away from catcher and ODB stops if from getting farther away from F2, where is the interference? If anything it helped F2 retrieve the ball faster?

Now if you change the play and the ODB kicked a slow moving ball farther away from F2 then of course you have the potential to have a different ruling on that play. Bottom line is if you judge the ODB's actions interfere with the defense's chance to get an out, you have a dead ball INT and someone is out.

[josephrt1]

Here is a question from 2016 ASA exam, Q7. Kind of similar to the question posed in this thread. The correct answer was D, dead ball, return runners. I think the question posed here is the same. In both Q7 and the question here, the offensive player was not where they are supposed to be. The ODB is allowed to "coach" at home plate but at 8 feet from the plate I want her to be alert and mobile. Getting hit by a throw at 8 feet, even if somewhat errant, I still think i have a blocked (dead) ball. If she were in the ODcircle, I would give more leeway. But I have not had to make this call on the field.

Q7 2016ASA: With no outs, R1 on 2B, R2 on 1B, B3 hits an uncaught line drive to left field. R1 rounds 3B, R2 rounds 2B and looks at F7’s throw that goes over F6’s head and is heading toward the 1B dugout. Seeing the overthrow R1 advances toward home, R2 advances toward 3B and the batter runner toward 2B. Prior to any runner touching the next base the ball contacts an offensive team member sitting in the dugout on a bucket with their feet in live ball territory, there is no defensive player in the area that would be capable of making an out.
a. Umpire signals and verbalizes “Dead ball” and awards both R1 and R2 home and the BR 3B since the ball would have entered dead ball territory had it not hit the offensive player.
b. Umpire should let play continue since the ball bounced off the offensive player and remained in live ball territory.
c. Umpire signals and verbalizes “Dead ball” and rules R1 (the runner closest to home is out) due to interference by an offensive player.
d. Umpire signals and verbalizes “Dead ball” and returns all runners to the last base touched at the time of the blocked ball.

There was also Q2 on 2016 ASA exam where runner scored and while on her way to dugout was hit by errant throw. Similar situation based on ump judgement if interference or not. I actually had this happen a while back and I let that one play on. Runner who scored was returning to dugout, away from plate area and throw was very wild and hit her from the side. In this case she was doing what she was supposed to and i kept ball live.

But these all have nuance and are HTBT type situations.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

Playing devil's advocate here, are we all sure there is a call to be made??

To be interference, there must be a play that is interfered with. The person involved says there was no play.

To be a blocked ball (thus dead), the ball must be handled by someone not in the game, or touch offensive equipment left on the field, or similar. The on deck batter IS permitted on the field, WAS doing an approved function, and an errant throw hits him. How is this different than an errant throw hitting a base coach; the ball remains live when that happens, UNLESS the coach fails the same charge, to not interfere??

Based on the description of the play, and if I were in agreement on the field, the ball hitting the on-deck batter likely was advantageous to the defense. I submit that I could certainly accept a "no call", and ball remaining live, as an acceptable ruling based on those judgments.

Actually, the ODB does not have approved functions. The rule (7.1.C) simply permits the ODB to leave the circle, it provides no additional protection and the ODB still cannot interfere with the defense attempting to make an out.

I agree, it doesn't seem to be INT. However, the ODB is not a player engaged in the game and meets the definition of a blocked ball.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Actually, the ODB does not have approved functions. The rule (7.1.C) simply permits the ODB to leave the circle, it provides no additional protection and the ODB still cannot interfere with the defense attempting to make an out.

I agree, it doesn't seem to be INT. However, the ODB is not a player engaged in the game and meets the definition of a blocked ball.

I read ASA 7.1-C(2) and NFHS 7-5-3-b, stating they may leave the on-deck circle to direct runners advancing to home plate, as permission to be there, and acting in the same function as a base coach. And, like a base coach, they cannot interfere.

But that permission to 1) be on the field, 2) leave the on-deck circle, and 3) perform an approved function tells me two things, at least:

A) Unlike the ASA case play referenced above, this person is somewhere they are permitted to be; not someone required to be in the dugout but affecting live ball play, and

B) How/why would we reference a blocked ball rule that applies to offensive items NOT permitted in live ball territory?

Absent a case play, or a specific rule citation, I do not believe this is a dead ball scenario; the ODB has permission to be there, doing exactly what the ODB was doing, did nothing to interfere, did not interfere, and did nothing intentional to be considered even an attempt to interfere with the opportunity to make an out (or play). Acting in an approved (base coach) function, the offense shouldn't be penalized for the misplay by the defense.

That's my opinion, anyway; and I don't see a clear rule cite that contradicts.

[josephrt1]

Hi Steve,

Looking at what you and Tru_in_Blu said, this would be a live ball. Looking at every citation in the ASA book related to on-deck batter, they only call a dead ball & runner out if actual interference with the ability to make an out. No citation calls for a blocked ball call. So let me ask you a follow up questions:.

lets say the ball hits the ODB the same way as in the original post with no play obvious at the time and the secondary runner was all the way back at the 3rd base bag. Now the ball deflects off the ODB and skips away allowing the runner to score. if the ball hadn't hit the ODB, it would have stopped at the backstop and catcher would flip to the pitcher. Maybe get the out or maybe runner doesn't attempt to come home. What would we have in this situation? It sounds like form your post that the ODB had a right to be there, did not interfere, so now we have a live ball which could lead to another run.

I'm not arguing with you, just following the thought through and i can't find a rule citation to counter you with. But i don't like the idea that an ODB can get close enough to get hit by a errant ball and not be penalized.

Thanks