The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sat May 19, 2018, 01:06pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu View Post

If you don't call INT, what rule allows you to send the runner back to third base?

Try NFHS Case Play 8.6.18 Sit. B.
8.6.13.

Since the rule does not specifically address this issue, I could see how this rule could be construed to kill the ball and return runners.

This is admittedly a stretch. Then again if the word "maliciously" was removed from Art 14......but that would also be a stretch.

My issue with the play and applicable rules is that there was no interference. As noted, the runner did not break for home until F3 was knocked to the ground, so at the time of the collision, there was no play with which to interfere.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 23, 2018, 06:31pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,210
Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA View Post
My issue with the play and applicable rules is that there was no interference. As noted, the runner did not break for home until F3 was knocked to the ground, so at the time of the collision, there was no play with which to interfere.
(Bold mine) Why does the bolded part have to be true? It seems to me the most minimal stretch is to treat this the same way we treat obstruction. It's actively happening until the runner recovers. Thus a runner tripped going around second just before getting to the base who falls between 2nd and 3rd was obstructed in between both 1st and 2nd and 2nd and 3rd. A fielder knocked down is actively interfered with until she recovers (but it wouldn't be a play if there was nothing to do in that time period). Usually that doesn't matter because the interference kills the ball. Here it would matter.
I'm not necessarily arguing for this (though it makes the most sense to me) just asking why that isn't the best reading of the hole in the rules.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 24, 2018, 09:01am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by youngump View Post
(Bold mine) Why does the bolded part have to be true? It seems to me the most minimal stretch is to treat this the same way we treat obstruction. It's actively happening until the runner recovers. Thus a runner tripped going around second just before getting to the base who falls between 2nd and 3rd was obstructed in between both 1st and 2nd and 2nd and 3rd. A fielder knocked down is actively interfered with until she recovers (but it wouldn't be a play if there was nothing to do in that time period). Usually that doesn't matter because the interference kills the ball. Here it would matter.
I'm not necessarily arguing for this (though it makes the most sense to me) just asking why that isn't the best reading of the hole in the rules.
So you are not going to kill the ball at the time of the collision? Anything subsequent to the ball becoming dead is irrelevant. On an INT call, we even suspend and rule on the location of the ball at the time of the INT and regardless of where the ball goes, its status does not change.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 24, 2018, 03:09pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,210
Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA View Post
So you are not going to kill the ball at the time of the collision? Anything subsequent to the ball becoming dead is irrelevant. On an INT call, we even suspend and rule on the location of the ball at the time of the INT and regardless of where the ball goes, its status does not change.
Why would I kill the ball? There hasn't been any interference yet because interference requires a play and we all agree there's no play to interfere with yet. Since the ball isn't dead subsequent events do matter.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 24, 2018, 04:35pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by youngump View Post
Why would I kill the ball? There hasn't been any interference yet because interference requires a play and we all agree there's no play to interfere with yet. Since the ball isn't dead subsequent events do matter.
Am active runner can be picked off at a base or try to advance.
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT.
It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 25, 2018, 08:42am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by youngump View Post
Why would I kill the ball? There hasn't been any interference yet because interference requires a play and we all agree there's no play to interfere with yet. Since the ball isn't dead subsequent events do matter.
I believe 8.6.13 covers that. As I read the OP, F3 was executing an immediate act of making a play on the BR and the effect includes an immediate dead ball.

As previously noted, it can be a stretch, but I believe this to be the closest rule in providing guidance to the umpire for this situation.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Runner collides with on deck batter Gmoore Softball 18 Wed Apr 23, 2014 07:04pm
fair/foul - then catch/no-catch David Emerling Baseball 36 Tue May 07, 2013 08:58am
Ref Collides with Player who has the Ball cshs81 Basketball 5 Fri Feb 08, 2008 07:54am
Catch or no catch(foul ball)? illiniwek8 Baseball 2 Sat Mar 25, 2006 07:16pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:22am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1