|
Thu Mar 16, 2006, 03:01pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
The following happened in a HS game the other day. I will tell you what the umpires ruled and what I think they should have ruled after everyone has had the chance to chime in.
R1 on 1B. B2 hits a hot grounder to F5 who boots the ball, sending it in the direction of the open offensive dugout. (No wall or screening to protect the bench). Before the ball enters the dugout, the ball caroms off an offensive player not in the game and who is sitting at the edge of the dugout, then into the dugout. What do you rule?
__________________
Scott It's a small world, but I wouldn't want to have to paint it. 
|
|
Thu Mar 16, 2006, 03:34pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
If she did then the runners stop at first and second. If the ball would have entered the dugout anyway, apply book rule. R1 at 3rd, B2 at second.
|
|
Thu Mar 16, 2006, 03:53pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
 Not sure if NFHS would be the same, but speaking ASA. It could be INT if the offensive player's presence prevented the defense from making a play. If not INT, the ball would be a blocked ball which kills the play and the runners would return to the base last touched at the time the ball became dead.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
|
|
Thu Mar 16, 2006, 04:58pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
I think I'm with Mike here. In almost any case like the one described, I don't see a play being interfered with. Forget what happens after the ball contacts the offensive player - it's dead already. Kill it and place runners, rounding down as one of my guys would say.
__________________
"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 Mar 16, 2006, 07:23pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
I agree, but sounds too simple without a discussion about intent. It would still be dead, runners going nowhere, but what about UC?
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT. It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be.
|
|
Thu Mar 16, 2006, 07:33pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
If the umpire determines the player deprived the defense from a possible out, then it's interference whether there is intent or not. If there is no possible play, then there is no INT regardless of intent. Remember, a possible play by the defense is still umpire judgment. I don't believe there is anything that has been noted here that would indicate an USC ruling.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
|
|
Thu Mar 16, 2006, 08:17pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
[QUOTE]Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
Quote:
If the contact with the player was intentionally defelecting into DBT whne there was a possible play, would that be UC?
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT. It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be.
|
|
Thu Mar 16, 2006, 08:47pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I was going from that piont of view. IMO the umpires should have kept the players and coaches not involved in the game off the field. Preventative officiating.
|
|
Thu Mar 16, 2006, 08:54pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
IF there's no play that might have been made by the defense
AND IF the offensive person was in live ball territory - I've got a blocked ball. The book tells me what to do with that. If there was a defensive play to be made, I've got interference. And - unrelated to the question - if that offensive person is a player, in live ball territory, I probably have a helmet violation and some other stuff to do.
__________________
Steve M
|
|
Thu Mar 16, 2006, 10:50pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
|
|
Fri Mar 17, 2006, 01:43am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why 2 bases? Isn't this a case of the ball getting away from a defense player, not a throw?
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT. It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be.
|
|
Fri Mar 17, 2006, 07:59am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Of course, this does not apply to a fair batted ball which leaves the playing field, in flight, in fair terrority.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
|
|
Fri Mar 17, 2006, 09:42am
|
|||
|
|||
|
The player who was sitting at the edge of the dugout had her legs over/on the playing field. There was no defender around besides the one who deflected the ball when she booted the play.
The umpires at this game ruled interference, however, and called R1 out and placed B2 on 1B. I thought that this was an incorrect ruling at the time, as apparently most of you did as well. My thought, when questioned by one of the umpires working the game was the ball should have been dead immediately, with B2 placed at 1B and R1 at 2B.
__________________
Scott It's a small world, but I wouldn't want to have to paint it.
|
|
Fri Mar 17, 2006, 10:59am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
"If there is no play, there is no interference." Interference is always with a play, not with the ball, and not with a player (excepting, of course, silly rule interpretations on running lane violations).
__________________
Tom
|
|
Fri Mar 17, 2006, 11:04am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Right up until the last part... what did you mean by "(excepting, of course, silly rule interpretations on running lane violations)"? Interference on a RLV is still interference with a play. No play, no 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
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
