![]() |
|
|
|||
fly ball interference
I think we answered this last year or before; but I can't find it.
USA Rules only, NFHS is very different; probably others. If a runner interferes with a fielder attempting a fair or foul fly ball which is catchable with ordinary effort; the runner is out and the batter is also out. 8.7.J.3 (1) effect F in the wrong place -------------------------------- Even if there were two outs before the play, the batter has completed a time at bat, so does not bat in the next inning. Is that correct, or does that batter appear again? ----------------------------------- Opinions are no help, already have both sides from very learned sources; need a case or play/clarification documented.
__________________
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. |
|
|||
Quote:
Let me offer this: you mentioned that in NFHS the rule is different; the effect is different in USA Softball if the runner interferes with a fielder on a ground ball. In both cases, interference is called and the batter is placed on first. Both cases result in the batter completing their time at bat. Therefore, why would this instance be any different? In all cases of interference in USA (and fair ball interference in NFHS), the batter has completed their time at bat. |
|
|||
In USA softball, if a runner interferes with a fielder on a pop fly ball, fair or foul catchable with normal effort both the runner and the batter are out. It is specified in the rule as well as the rule supplements. Has been that way for many years, and yes nfhs is different.
|
|
|||
Quote:
Now the conundrum. It has been suggested elsewhere that the player in question be the lead-off the following inning. IMO, that is not possible by rule or common sense. To allow that player to bat again, you must ignore the previous action. If you ignore that pop fly in the previous inning, you have no ball put into play and in turn, cannot have INT and if you did not have INT, the previous inning never came to a proper end. ![]()
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball. |
|
|||
Neither
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball. |
|
|||
Allows 4th out appeals, but ONLY against a runner who has scored a run.
|
|
|||
Quote:
Otherwise, saying batting again ignores the out, but both outs occur simultaneously; so ignoring he batter’s out would ignore the runner’s out.
__________________
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. |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Interference with F3 on Fly Ball | Manny A | Softball | 23 | Thu Jun 14, 2018 12:56pm |
Men's "wreck" ball interference | tiger49 | Baseball | 2 | Mon Jul 14, 2003 08:04pm |
Interference on routine fly ball | greymule | Softball | 1 | Thu Aug 01, 2002 03:26pm |
There's no interference. Just dead ball, right? | spots101 | Baseball | 7 | Tue Jun 18, 2002 12:18am |
Interference on Ball 4 | PeteBooth | Baseball | 3 | Tue Aug 29, 2000 11:42pm |