|
Thu Jan 08, 2004, 11:14pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
I was looking at the TASO web site and Walt Sparks was clarifying a rule interpretation/enforcement for NFHS. The situation is runners on 1st and 2nd. The coach calls time and holds a meeting. When they break up, the runners switch places. When it is caught, the enforcement is 2 outs are declared. Ejection of both players and the coach is optional, if you believe it was intentional. I asked for an explanation of this and was told that it is considered unsportsmanlike conduct. Which begged the question, if it's based on the unsportsmanlike conduct rule, why are outs applied and why are the ejections optional?
I have never seen this, or even heard of it happening, I am just a little confused on the thought process that went into the enforcement of the rule, and whether it's even the right rule to use. I could see ejection of the players and/or coach if I absolutely knew it was deliberate. I'm not sure where the outs can be justified.  Rick [Edited by TexBlue on Jan 8th, 2004 at 10:16 PM] 
|
|
Fri Jan 09, 2004, 01:02am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
"If you want something that is fair in life, hit a ball between first and third base." John Palko Pittsburgh, PA
|
|
Fri Jan 09, 2004, 01:04am
|
|||
|
|||
|
YAY!!!! 100 posts... oops... 101!!!!
__________________
"If you want something that is fair in life, hit a ball between first and third base." John Palko Pittsburgh, PA
|
|
Fri Jan 09, 2004, 07:15am
|
|||
|
|||
|
I think that the rule was written because some coach or coaches had actually tried to implement the play.
Without the specific rule, you might have one out for one runner passing the other. We also have the rule that puts a batter or runner out for USC (BR throws bat in anger, ball goes over fence, BR still called out; or runner slides safely into 3B but throws an elbow into F5's face: runner out). If each runner has committed USC, they both could be called out. On the other hand, the rule applies the outs even if the runners switch unintentionally. It would be tough to characterize an unintentional mistake as USC.
__________________
greymule More whiskey—and fresh horses for my men! Roll Tide!
|
|
Fri Jan 09, 2004, 09:11am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Without the specific rule, you might have one out for one runner passing the other. We also have the rule that puts a batter or runner out for USC (BR throws bat in anger, ball goes over fence, BR still called out; or runner slides safely into 3B but throws an elbow into F5's face: runner out). If each runner has committed USC, they both could be called out.
Yeah, I understand the reasoning for calling the outs. I'm not sure why, if you're using the USC the to call the outs, you would not have to eject all three. It kinda sounds like they're waffling on the subject. You shouldn't be able to use the "...passing the lead runner ..." rule because it's a dead ball situation when they "passed" each other. Rick
|
|
Fri Jan 09, 2004, 09:24am
|
|||
|
|||
Consider the Fed rules. The ruling makes perfect sense.
Take the offense one step at a time as it happened, just as you would a live ball play. Naturally the offense, as Mike pointed out, hasn't actually happened untill the ball is made live. (It should be killed immediately after being made live if you are aware of the sitch at that point.) 1: The trailling runner is out for passing a preceeding runner (8-6-4) 2: The lead runner is out for abandoning a base (8-6-22) Note that this is apparently different from ASA in that the runner does not have to enter the team area to abandon. Note how the conjunction is used in the sentence to read abandons a base (or) enter the team area. 3: The ejection is under 3-6-15 in which the penalty gives the option of "shall eject... unless the offense is judged to be of a minor nature. ..." Roger Greene Edit: All of the cites I gave were from the 2004 book. [Edited by Roger Greene on Jan 9th, 2004 at 09:17 AM]
|
|
Fri Jan 09, 2004, 09:28am
|
|||
|
|||
|
January 30, 2003
Memo from Walt Sparks, UIC for TASO Softball Quoting Mr. Sparks - Copying and pasting what was posted. Rule Clarification - Runners Switching on the Bases Rule 3-3-10 #3, 8-3-6; 8-6-4; 10-2-38 With R1 at second base, R2 at first base and a 1-1 count on B3, the offensive coach requests time to speak with the runners and batter. When the players return to their bases, R1 and R2 have switched bases. After the next pitch to B3, the defensive coach asks for time and appeals to the umpire that the runners are on the wrong bases. RULING: The umpire shall rule both R1 and R2 out for switching bases. Both are guilty of base-running infractions. If, in the umpire's judgment, the act was deliberate, both players would be ejected for unsporting behavior. Without trying to start something nor meaning to be a wise***, break down the rules that were stated as being utilized for pentaly imposed for this infraction utilizing 2003 NFHS Rule Book. Rule 3 Sec 3 Art 10 #3. There were only 2 Articles under Sec 3 and no mention of switching bases. Rule 8 Sec 3 Art 6. Art 6. A runner shall not run bases in reverse order either to confuse the fielders or to make a travesty of the game. Would this apply? Rule 8 Sec 6 Art 4. Physically passing a preceding runner before that runner has been put out. Penalty - ball is in play and the runner is out. One out. Rule 10 Sec 2 Art 38. Only 3 Articles listed. 2004 Rule Book. 3-3-10 Is about bleeding coaches/players. 8-3-6 Running bases in reverse order. 8-6-4 passing preceding runner 10-2-38 no 38 only 3 articles. Since this was put out originially in 2003, why didn't 2004 Rule book update? Try quoting these rules to a book wise coach. I am not belitting Mr. Sparks. I have worked several tournanments when he has been present, even gotten a couple of nice compliments from him. However, if rules have changed, the books need to be updated. Our chapter did not receive any written communications on this subject. I was aware of it because of the ASA change. glen ________________________________ A player who makes the team great, is better than a great player.
__________________
glen _______________________________ "Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover." --Mark Twain.
|
|
Fri Jan 09, 2004, 02:15pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Rule 8 Sec 6 Art 4. Physically passing a preceding runner before that runner has been put out.
Penalty - ball is in play and the runner is out. One out. But this applies to a live ball situation. The scenario posed is in a dead ball situation. I don't believe this rule applies here. Rick
|
|
Fri Jan 09, 2004, 02:25pm
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
SamC [Edited by SamNVa on Jan 9th, 2004 at 01:30 PM]
|
|
Fri Jan 09, 2004, 03:26pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
That is why the offense has not occured until the ball is made live. Just as if an illegal substitute is entered as a runner, there is no penalty unless the ball is made live.(see 3-3-3-e) It is at that point the offense has occured. When the ball is placed in play, the runner has advanced beyond the preceeding runner on the basepath. Mike and I both made that point, I thought. Roger Greene
|
|
Fri Jan 09, 2004, 04:12pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
apply to the situation. glen ________________________________________ A player who makes the team great, is better than a great player.
__________________
glen _______________________________ "Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover." --Mark Twain.
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
