My daughter is on the team so I was a spectator on this one. Fed rules Girls Slowpitch State playoff game. R1 on second. HARD line shot back to pitcher who deflects the ball then picks it up and throws it wild to first after runner had passed. Ball then hits helmet in visitor's dugout and deflects back to pitcher who throws wild home on R1 coming home which was safe. Play ends with BR on 2nd and R1 home. Umpires meet and Bring R1 back to 3rd and leave BR on 2nd. I figured after the meeting that they were going to leave R1 with the score and put BR on 3rd as the throw was after the girl had passed 1st. I asked the PU why afterwards as we are good friends and he gave me his explanation: Anyone want to venture why the call was called like that?

I presume that since you and the PU spoke that the statement about the ball being thrown after BR had touched first was the umpire's opinion and not just yours. If that is the case, BR should have been at third. R1, at 2B at the start of the play, would have been award home whether or not they had already obtained third at the time of the throw.

(I believe that "baseball" rules state that if the play is the first from the infield, the award is from the location at the time of the pitch and not the time of the throw.)

Speculating on the awards those umpires dished out, I can only guess they used the "sand-lot rule" of one base on an overthrow. I wonder if they call the hands part of the bat and give ties to the runners. (In that case the whole situation might have been avoided if the visitors had just yelled, "Do-overs!")

Strictly a guess applying ASA rules:

The only correct ruling I can imagine would be if they ruled R1 had not yet reached 2B when the pitcher released the ball and awarded bases are based on the position of the lead runner when two are between the same bases.

Other than that, I cannot think there is any other reason to justify their ruling.

"The only correct ruling I can imagine would be if they ruled R1 had not yet reached 2B"

But, the situation presented by Dukat had R1 starting on 2B. Maybe she was going back, thinking the ball had been caught, but at a minimum she was already at 2B so there could not be two runners between the same bases at the time of the throw.

BTW - both the NFHS casebook and ASA POE37 are going to give you the same interpretation that only the lead runner can be advanced two bases (when two runners are between the same bases).

IMO, the umpires were wrong - at least as far as is known based on what Dukat told us. The only time that ONE base is awarded is when a fielder loses possession of the ball to DBT. That could happen if F3 caught the ball from F1 and swung her glove at the BR - and lost the ball into DBT. It would be a real stretch to suggest that F1 "lost possession" of the ball when she threw it into the dugout.

WMB

Would you believe that I realized that and was testing the rest of the board?

No!?!? Well, you're right, I just didn't read the scenario properly. And I agree, that there is no other way to justify the award UNLESS, R1 jumped off the base toward 1B when she saw the line drive heading up the middle and the umpire ruled that 2B would be the 1st base of a two-base award. Still wrong, but I can see someone making that call.

d:-)

OK, I don't have a Fed book with me to look up and see if the rule was correct but he stated that since the overthrow came from the Pitcher it was only a 1 base award and not a 2 base award. He went on to state with the backup of the BU that any other player that would have overthrown the ball would have had a 2 base award but with it being the pitcher throwing it it was only a 1 base award. When the line drive came in the girl at 2nd did not run right away in case she caught it so she was between 2nd and 3rd and BR was past 1st at the time of the errant throw therefore BR at 2nd and R1 at 3rd. I didnt argue past "I need to look that up and get back with you" Opinions?

<b> <i>OK, I don't have a Fed book with me to look up and see if the rule was correct but he stated that since the overthrow came from the Pitcher it was only a 1 base award and not a 2 base award. He went on to state with the backup of the BU that any other player that would have overthrown the ball would have had a 2 base award but with it being the pitcher throwing it it was only a 1 base award. When the line drive came in the girl at 2nd did not run right away in case she caught it so she was between 2nd and 3rd and BR was past 1st at the time of the errant throw therefore BR at 2nd and R1 at 3rd. I didnt argue past "I need to look that up and get back with you" Opinions?</B> </I>

Well, I've looked through 2002 and 2003 Rule and Case books. Nowhere does it give an exception for the pitcher throwing the ball.

<b> Rule 8-4-3-g states, for a ball in play and overthrown (beyond the boundary lines ) PENALTY: All runners will be awarded two bases, and the award will be governed by the positions of the runners when the ball left the fielder's hand....... </b>

In the case book Rule 8.4.3 situations N & O both state two bases awarded from the position of the runners at the time of the throw.

Again, no mention of exceptions for pitchers throwing the ball at any time.

Was there no protest on this? What was the coach thinking? If the coach is good enough to get the team to the State Playoffs, you'd think they would be good enough to know this is wrong.

Actually I saw the coach pointing toward third during the discussion so I know she was trying to convince him of the 2 base award and they are State Champions last 3 years going for 4 in a row and she is the winningest coach in the state so she knows. And those same two runs that got sent back got home on the next play when the next batter put one over the right field fence. Which brings up another question, Say she did protest and ended up losing the game later but those runners that got sent back ended up scoring anyway. Does the protest become null and void once the play you were protesting ended up not hurting you? I hope this is not considered a stupid question but I have gotten conflicting answers on this with some other Blues that I respect so I thought I would ask here. And BTW this is just conjucture as the game was won so a protest wouldnt matter anyway.

First things first... the umpire was wrong. There <b><i>is</i></b> provision that if a <b><i>pitch</i></b> goes out of play, that is a one base award. But that is a pitch from the pitching plate, not a throw from the pitcher. A pitcher not on the pitching plate delivering a pitch is just another infielder. (Except for the lookback rule... but let's not go there.)

Second, if a protest is properly made, and if the protest is then followed-up with whatever rules your association has (like send in a written report within 24 hours,) the game will be played from the point of the protest if the protest is upheld. That happens if the game is lost by the offended team, whether or not the subsequent actions of the situation did not "matter", e.g. the runners scored anyway.

<b><i>However,</i></b> the protest panel, body, committee or whatever, basically has ultimate authority. It the score was something like 47-2, or they think the subsequent actions of the situation made the play not "matter", they could deny the protest. But I have only heard rumors of that ever happening. I believe the good ones would make sure the decision was just.

The ball was thrown by a fielder making a play with the batted ball. When playing a batted ball, the pitcher is no different than any other fielder.

Huh?

Where did these umpires come from???? Soon as ball enters dugout and hits helmet in the Visitor's dugout--"Dead Ball".
R1 is awarded home and BR is awarded 3rd. End of story. I can't believe the batting coach let this go.

http://www.stopstart.freeserve.co.uk/smilie/nono.gif

Just one other note. Dukat keeps mentioning that the pitcher threw it wild to first after the batter passed the base. Remember - it's when the ball is released that matters. The beginning part of the play sounds like a bang bang play: hard liner bounces off the pitcher who fields it herself. It's possible (probable?) that the throw was made BEFORE the batter reached first - but hit the dugout after the batter reached first. This would put the BR at 2nd, not 3rd.

To be awarded 3rd, the throw would have had to have been initiated (to first base) AFTER the BR reached first - which would beg the question - why did she throw to first. I suspect that didn't happen, although I admit the possibility.

All that said - I can't think of any ruling that would put R1 at 3rd, for the reasons mentioned above.

[
Well, you're right, I just didn't read the scenario properly. d:-) [/B][/QUOTE]


Another good example of why SB should use R2 instead of R1 on second........

And you guys have the rule nailed.

Roger Greene

When I first started officiating, I wondered why we had so little credibility.
If anyone is new enough to still wonder, reread this topic.

Well, I don't know if avoiding embarrassing one of our most esteemed members is a good reason. Come to think of it, maybe your example is a good reason to keep the softball system. http://www.click-smilies.de/sammlung...smiley-034.gif
Besides, be careful - you have just indirectly accused Mike of reading the scenario using the baseball system. He might get a little miffed at that! http://www.click-smilies.de/sammlung...smiley-001.gif