When Is A Walk Not A Free Base ?

[Bandit]

Does the NFHS rules ever state that a batter being awarded first base by a walk is also given first base without the liability to be put out?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by Bandit
Does the NFHS rules ever state that a batter being awarded first base by a walk is also given first base without the liability to be put out?

I hope not because I don't believe that is what they preach.

[Dakota]

Originally posted by Bandit
Does the NFHS rules ever state that a batter being awarded first base by a walk is also given first base without the liability to be put out?

No.

If you are intending to take this into running lane violation territory, WMB asked for a ruling on this from his state rules interpreter (I'm going on memory, here, WMB, ...) and NFHS continues to stand by their interpretation that a BR awarded a BOB can still be called for interference on a running lane violation.

[scottk_61]

Originally posted by Dakota
and NFHS continues to stand by their interpretation that a BR awarded a BOB can still be called for interference on a running lane violation.

Nothing has changed, the violation is still relevant even in a walk.

[Steve M]

I agree, in Fed, the B-R must still observe the running lane on a walk. I also asked out Pa state interpreter about this a few years ago - he was a member of the Fed rules committee then - they stand by that & insist it's a good rule.

[WinterWillie]

Originally posted by Dakota

No.

If you are intending to take this into running lane violation territory, WMB asked for a ruling on this from his state rules interpreter (I'm going on memory, here, WMB, ...) and NFHS continues to stand by their interpretation that a BR awarded a BOB can still be called for interference on a running lane violation.

Here is the answer from the NFHS - and it will surprise you!

From my e-mail this morning:

"Tom: I checked with the NF on the walked batter staying in the running lane question...I stand corrected....The rule reference is 8-3-11 requiring awarded bases to be run legally. Therefore when a walked runner is outside the lane while running to first base and is struck by a throw to first, interference is the call. It will be reviewed at the June meeting. - Randy Allen

WMB

[ April 23, 2004, 09:12 AM: Message edited by: WestMichBlue ]

Reprinted without WMB's permission

[greymule]

I'm aware of the ruling. However, I would think that, just as there must be a "quality" throw, there must be some reason for the throw to first. Offhand, I can't think of any. What's the play where the running lane violation would apply on a walk?

[Stat-Man]

From Greymule:
I'm aware of the ruling. However, I would think that, just as there must be a "quality" throw, there must be some reason for the throw to first. Offhand, I can't think of any. What's the play where the running lane violation would apply on a walk?

I can site something that happened in our game 3 days ago:
R1 on 3rd base; B2 draws a walk. F2 throws to F3 to ensure the BR does not try to steal second in an attempt to draw a throw (and have R1 steal home).

Does this help?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by Stat-Man
From Greymule:
I'm aware of the ruling. However, I would think that, just as there must be a "quality" throw, there must be some reason for the throw to first. Offhand, I can't think of any. What's the play where the running lane violation would apply on a walk?

I can site something that happened in our game 3 days ago:
R1 on 3rd base; B2 draws a walk. F2 throws to F3 to ensure the BR does not try to steal second in an attempt to draw a throw (and have R1 steal home).

Does this help?

No. There is no imminent play at 1st base therefore, there is no reason for a defender to be taking a throw at 1B.

Is the interference call not for interfering with the receiving of a throw taken AT 1b by the defensive player? If the BR is entitled to advance to 1B on a walk, where is the play? BTW, just how often does F3 take the throw AT 1B? Seems to me, they quite often receive the throw away from the base. Once again, where is the play with which the BR is interfering.

This entire play by the defense is completely extraneous and somewhat "bush" in my opinion. Throw the ball back to the pitcher in the circle and move either F4 or F3 up to the base line. Once the BR touches 1B, the runner on 3B must return to the base or be called out. If the BR continues throw the ball to closest defender to make the tag. If the runner from 3rd takes off, the defender is less than 60' away and can advance to force the runner to commit or stop. If the runner stops, toss the ball to the pitcher in the circle, but keep advancing to an area between the runner and the plate. If the runner is stopped once the ball is in the circle, she must commit or be called out and she is not going to walk toward F3/F4 now standing in her path.

Yes, it takes practice and intelligence, but what is more important is the knowledge that a thrown ball is going to travel faster than the runner. Isn't that why there are coaches?

Another point is that if the ball isn't in the circle, that runner on 3B doesn't need to cover 60' to score. Then there is the chance of the ball getting by F3, then you have scored a run AND allowed the BR to advance farther than the walk would have permitted.

Another case of people trying to build a better mousetrap when the existing one works just fine.

JMHO,

[jjohnson]

NFHS RULE BOOK
2-63
Walk. A walk is four pitches thrown out of the strike zone awarding the batter first base. (Doesn't say without liability to be put out)

8-2-4 The batter-runner is out...
The batter-runner fails to advance to first base and enters the team area after a batted fair ball, a base on balls, a het batter (F.P.), a dropped third strike (F.P.), or catcher obstruction.

8-2-5 The batter-runner is out...
She runs outside the three-foot lane and, in thejudgment of the umpire, interferes with the fielder taking the throw at first base; however, the batter-runner may run outside the three-foot lane to avoid a fielder attempting to field a batted ball. (I don't see an exception here for a walk)

8-3-11
Awarded bases must be run legally.

I believe these four rule references is why the NFHS rules that "if on a walk, the batter-runner interferes with a throw to first while they are out of the running lane, THEY ARE OUT."

[Dakota]

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
Another case of people trying to build a better mousetrap when the existing one works just fine.

JMHO,

Be that as it may, NFHS has been clear about how they want it called. I happen to agree - there is not an actual play at 1st to be interfered with; a tactic, maybe, but not a play. Nonetheless, when calling NFHS, if the situation comes up, I'll call it according to their interps.

[Woodchuck]

8-2-5 .....if in the umpires judgement.....

That's the end of the story, make your call accordingly.

[IRISHMAFIA]

When this first hit a couple of years ago, there was an ASA national school in PA and this interpretation arose in conversation. Since then it has also been raised at last year's UIC Clinic and I have yet to hear anyone in ASA even remotely try to support the NFHS interp. Some literally scoffed at it.

If that's what the Fed wants, that's fine. But I don't think you will ever find it in any other serious organization.