|
Thu Jan 19, 2006, 02:45pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
College FP game, NCAA rules.
Runner on 3B, no outs. Batter takes ball 1 and steps backward out of the box. As she is holding her bat in front of herself, adjusting her grip on it, F2 attempts a pickoff at 3B, though it is more an attempt to keep the runner honest than a real try at an out. The batter reacts with a slight downward flinch of the head. The ball hits the batter in the helmet and sails over the dugout. Would you allow the run to score or call interference on the batter (or something else)?
__________________
greymule More whiskey—and fresh horses for my men! Roll Tide! 
|
|
Thu Jan 19, 2006, 03:16pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
NCAA Rule 9-8-b
"The batter shall not hinder the catcher or any other fielder from catching or throwing the ball by stepping out of the batter's box or intentionally hinder a player (e.g., on a steal/pickoff throw or a play at the plate) while standing within the batter's box." note 2 "If the catcher or her throw to a base hits the batter or her bat while she is in the batter's box, the ball is live and there is no interference unless the contact is intentional and initiated by the batter." Since in your scenario, the batter has left the batter's box, she has given up her protection the batter's box affords her. Now she is required to stay out of the way. Since she didn't, I would have interference, batter out, and return the runner to 3B.
|
|
Thu Jan 19, 2006, 03:36pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
However (bet you knew that was coming), if this progressed at the pace I felt while reading the scenario, it might be nothing more than a DMC. I'm seeing a batter, regaining her balance after a pitch, stepping back, two or three steps toward foul territory. Do not the catchers at the collegiate level receive the ball, stand and step up on or across the plate to insure a good, crisp return to the pitcher? I must be missing something because I don't see the batter being in line with a throw to 3B and the catcher's reaction to the runner seemed slow while progressing through the scenario.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
|
|
Thu Jan 19, 2006, 04:25pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
If this batter stepped a couple of feet further foul than she started, it would almost require intent on the CATCHER's part to hit her.
I envisioned this as a batter stepping back - but more along the line of the 3B Line, not straight back. In that case, sorry batter, we have interference.
__________________
"Many baseball fans look upon an umpire as a sort of necessary evil to the luxury of baseball, like the odor that follows an automobile." - Hall of Fame Pitcher Christy Mathewson
|
|
Thu Jan 19, 2006, 10:01pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yes, it's the pace of what happened that is troubling me, as well as the fact that there was no real chance to put the runner out. It was not the standard play you envision when you read the rule: runner stealing, batter steps out of the box and gets hit with the throw, with everything happening in a fluid process.
The batter was standing far toward the pitcher, a few inches from the line, and after the pitch she stepped directly backward. So she was standing close to the 3B line. And the catcher did not throw to 3B immediately, as if she had decided before the pitch that she was going to try a pickoff. After a slight delay, she made a sudden throw that seemed to be on impulse. It took me by surprise. And indeed she did not step out and throw. She simply stood in the catcher's box and fired the ball toward 3B. This is how she ended up hitting the batter. To take an extreme example, suppose that after the pitch, the ball rolls away a few feet from the catcher and the runner on 3B comes down the line. The batter takes a step backward out of the box and is readjusting her grip on the bat. The catcher picks up the ball and as she is walking back to her position, notices the runner off 3B. At this point, with plenty of time to step one way or the other to avoid the stationary batter (who is admittedly out of the box), she makes a quick throw toward 3B, but the ball hits the batter and goes out of play. Book rule of course would be batter out for interference, but something about this call doesn't seem right to me. Maybe it's because it seems that the play has developed after the batter has already left the box. Maybe I think too much.
__________________
greymule More whiskey—and fresh horses for my men! Roll Tide!
|
|
Thu Jan 19, 2006, 11:07pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
IMHO, this is a case of "rulebook smart, ballpark wrong," but in this case, again IMHO, you were ballpark right.
__________________
John An ucking fidiot
|
|
Fri Jan 20, 2006, 12:00am
|
|||
|
|||
|
I never heard that term, "rulebook smart, ballpark wrong," but it's appropriate for some calls. I also don't know (or remember) what a DMC is.
Anyway, the call I did make was sort of a "none of the above." I ruled that the runner couldn't advance because the batter was hit when she was out of the box. But I did not call the batter out, since there was no real play at 3B for her to interfere with. The coaches accepted my ruling without too much fuss. For what's it's worth, there was some kind of umpire official in attendance, and he approached me between games and told me he thought I had done the right thing. Since the coaches didn't complain and the official was OK with my call, I guess it was "ballpark right." As for being rulebook right . . .
__________________
greymule More whiskey—and fresh horses for my men! Roll Tide!
|
|
Fri Jan 20, 2006, 09:23am
|
|||
|
|||
|
I think that on a delayed play, even moreso than on a normal one, the batter has the responsibility to remove herself from the path of a play. If the ball gets away, as in your 2nd scenario, she SURELY can't absolve herself of responsibility by simply remaining in the area (and out of the box) while adjusting her bat. If there's a reasonable chance that SOMETHING might be going on, she needs to be more aware than this girl.
In your OP, while I think your actual ruling was unique, it certainly isn't unsupportable, and was probably the most equitable solution. I agree that there are situations that fall into the category of "rulebook right, ballpark wrong", but I would submit that a majority of them would not be supportable if protested.
__________________
"Many baseball fans look upon an umpire as a sort of necessary evil to the luxury of baseball, like the odor that follows an automobile." - Hall of Fame Pitcher Christy Mathewson
|
|
Fri Jan 20, 2006, 10:59am
|
|||
|
|||
|
I believe that you made the right call, and since neither coach fought with you, it seems that they thought the same. I've found that the interference call is a difficult one to make, because of the wording, "in the mind of the umpire" did the player "intentially" inferfere with the play. I've brought this up before at meetings, and it seems that there hasn't a consences. I look at "intent" on both the offensive player and the defensive player. Did the batter intentually interfere with the catcher in order to give her runner and unfair advantage? Or did the catcher, seeing an opportunity to get a call, throw the ball looking for interference. I've overheard coaches tell their catchers to throw the ball, hoping that it will hit a runner along the base line or a batter out of the box, in hopes of getting an interference call. To me interference must be intentual on the part of the player..that is she makes a cognitive decision to interfere with the play, much like Rodriguez did in the playoffs last year.
To make a long story short, in my mind, your call was the correct one.
|
|
Fri Jan 20, 2006, 11:52am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Of course, you could have just reached for your brush and tell the coaches that play was suspended to clean the plate.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
|
|
Fri Jan 20, 2006, 11:57am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Of course, you could have just reached for your brush and tell the coaches that play was suspended to clean the plate.
Yes. The longer I umpire, the more I am aware of that particular escape valve. "Come on, Coach. The whole park heard me call time. Keep your ears open."
__________________
greymule More whiskey—and fresh horses for my men! Roll Tide!
|
|
Sat Jan 21, 2006, 03:13pm
|
|||
|
|||
A similar play happened at our recent U15 boys ( what you would call I suppose District Championship).
A strike is called on the batter and it hits the catchers glove and drops and rolls forward to sit on the plate . At the same time a runner on first steals , the catcher goes to pick the ball up but the batter has stepped forward,unintentionally and the catcher has trouble picking the ball up . I am base , I wait a second thinking come on , come on , but I have to call it and come up with interference . Post game I discuss it with the plate ump and he considered int didnt occur . We have some teaching explanation to do . This is a recently badged or I suppose what you would consider recently qualified ump .
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
