And read rule NFHS 2-30 "Infield fly", specifically . . "a fair ball" and then read what makes a ball fair NFHS 2-20.

That's why we say: "Infield fly, the batter is out, IF FAIR". The batter isn't out until the ball is fair by NFHS 2-20 or USA 1 - Fair ball.

If your logic is that the ball is not fair until the criteria of 2-20 are met, then your logic must also be that a ball is not foul until the criteria of 2-25 are met.

So, after reading 8-5-1, you must allow runners to keep any bases they reach during a high foul ball. Or a little spinner down the line where the runners have all advanced at least one base before the ball crossed the line from fair to foul before being picked up? That was the last base they legally occupied when the ball became foul, right?

The part I am having trouble with on this is the interference part. Can someone please post a reference to why this was called interference by the batter runner (retired batter). She certainly does continue to run to first base, but I don't see anything in her running to first base that interferes with F3's ability to catch the ball. I simply see F3 misplay the ball.

Looking back to the 2013 casebook, there is a comment about a runner continuing to run and drawing a throw may be considered interference. In this case I the runner continued to run, but does appear to do anything to physical interfere with the ability to catch the ball. The same comment is in the 2016 casebook.

A batted ball has no fair/foul status until it meets the definition of fair or foul. As to your NFHS 8 5 1 reference (and you should include which code you are citing), you are focused on "legally occupied". If you read part C, it overtly states "last based TOUCHED" for interference by a BR. This now differentiates "last base touched" from "legally occupied". Furthermore, read the effects of NFHS 8 5 1, notice the phrase about "intervening bases".

BTW, USA 8 6 uses the phrase "their base", and uses the phrase "last base touched" for BR interference.

My last point about fair/foul status: when a fly ball is hit in the outfield (say over fair territory) are you declaring it fair while in the air? In a pop fly where the catcher is tracking in foul territory, are you holding up your arms to indicate foul? Or your aforementioned little spinner down the line -- are you indicating fair prior to being touched, then changing your signal to foul once touched over foul territory? Of course, the answers to all these questions are: "No, I don't indicate fair or foul until one of the two definitions are met."

Easy, who ever made the decision was wrong, as who ever decided the outcome of this play (I believe the guy in blue jeans and the shoulder stripped navy jacket) was wrong.

My thanx to Big Slick for a compelling argument on this subject.

I initially thought this play could result in 2 outs. I no longer think that based on Slick's excellent citations.

I will stick to my opinion that I think the BR interfered w/ F3. That's a judgment call that an umpire has to make in short order before chaos breaks out.

I've had similar plays where the BR runs very close to the fielder, sometimes in an intimidating manner to make the fielder wary of a collision. When I can actually see the fielder flinch as the runner goes past, I know they were hindered. Whether they catch the ball or not, they were still interfered with.

Some folks continue to debate when the batter is out. I will call an IF when I'm supposed to, but the matter isn't really settled until the ball's status has been determined. And that's what I'll say about that.

Thanx to all for a lively and informative session.

Hey TB21, you made me think on this one, so I'm going to return the favor.

When I think too much, I need to go back to the book.

5.5.B
No run shall be scored if the third out of the inning is the result of:
1. A BR being called out prior to reaching first base or any other runner forced out due to the batter becoming a batter-runner.

In our TWP, (and assuming already 1 out) when the BR interferes, she becomes the second out. Umpire determines her INT was an attempt to prevent a double play. But the runner from third has already touched home prior to the INT, so the next runner closest to home is at second base.

Now do we score the run?

My entire point is that the umpire may not know or be able to determine whether it is fair or foul until the criteria are met. BUT, the batted ball always had that status from the time it hit the bat. It is fair/foul the moment it is hit, even if the umpires do not know which yet. Similarly, the IF is an IF the moment it is hit and the batter is out at that time, even if it takes the umpires a couple seconds to determine/realize it.

If you say it "has no fair/foul status" until it meets the definitions, then you have to read NFHS 8-5-1 as allowing runners to continue to advance until the ball "is foul." This is absurd. It was foul the moment it was hit, even if nobody knew it yet.

Sorry, I find this statement to be absurd.

Ever heard of or seen a hook or a slice? Ever done a game where the wind is gusting upwards of 40 mph or more? (And in that windy game, is ANY batted fly ball possible to catch with ordinary effort?) Ever had a spinning ground ball near a foul line where the coaches are yelling to the defender to "let it go foul" or "keep it foul"?

I'd have to guess "no".

Fair foul status
 

I guess I need to be included in the group which says the ball has no status fair / foul until is actually meets the definition of a fair ball or a foul ball by the rule book. We may come to an educated conclusion a ball will be fair or foul, but the ball has not actually attained that status until the ball meets that definition.

For example, we have the bases loaded, 2 outs and a 3-2 count. The runners are leaving hard towards the next base on the release of the pitch. The batter hits a popup with a lot of backspin on it that lands on the between first and the pitchers plate without being touched. Due to the spin the ball rolls backward and crosses the foul line and settles after the 3 base runners have all reached base and the batter runner has reached first base.

Everyone has attained a base from what they occupied at the time of the pitch, prior to the ball's status being determined. The ruling is still a foul ball and everyone goes back to the base occupied at the time of the pitch. Everyone may have assumed the status of the ball would be fair given it was hit into fair territory, but nothing actually made the status of the ball fair so the ball never attained the status of a fair ball.

Watching the video I think the first base ump did come in an was calling interference on the play. I think he was making the call live on the field but did not do so in a manner that would draw attention to himself as would be needed in a play such as this.

I think the additional person was the one who had to sort out what the penalties were in the given situation.

I do think, if the interference call was correct, the interference was done by a retired batter-runner and as such the applicable penalties were correctly applied.

My issue with the play is the calling of interference by the batter runner on this play, as I simply don't see that.

IMO, the status of the ball is determined simultaneously with anything which causes the play to be dead.

If they called the interference on the BR interfering with F3 catching the fly ball, you can only get one out. The BR is NOT retired until the ball achieved fair status, which would be when it plugged into the ground in fair territory. If BR was out on the interference, then dead ball, 1 out.

If she was not out by interfering with F3 catching the fly ball, then she was retired when the ball became fair, but by then, she was passed F3 and she did not interfere with F3 after that. That's the only way you are getting two outs, and they didn't happen.

Read my earlier post on the two options, either interference on BR, dead ball, she is out (1 out); or no BR interference, but BR out on infield fly, and runner is safe at home. And I don't care if BR interfered or not (again, I don't think she did), but either way, getting two outs on the play is wrong.

It will be interesting to see if we get any official interpretations out of this from NFHS (or any other ruling bodies).

Take a look at this. Seems there are a couple of plays that might shed a little light on this conversation.

https://www.teamusa.org/usa-softball...34F77D1AD&_z=z