Double Base - Foul Territory

[tzme415]

ASA Men's 12" SP - Double Base at 1B

Batter hits a hot shot to F3 - Ball bounces off F3 into foul territory - F3 retrieves ball and dives back touching orange (foul) side of bag just ahead of BR - I call BR "OUT" - Get big argument that the fielder cannot use orange part of bag, but as I read the rule the fielder can use the orange part when making a play from foul territory.

Was I correct?

[Dakota]

Correctomundo. (This board does not allow me to simply type "Correct." Says the post is too short. OOO board.)

[AtlUmpSteve]

Correct ruling. Force play made from foul territory.

[SC Ump]

Yeah? Oh, I guess you are right.

[tcblue13]

Originally Posted by SC Ump

Yeah? Oh, I guess you are right.

I guess he is

[rodan55]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Correctomundo. (This board does not allow me to simply type "Correct." Says the post is too short. OOO board.)

Affirmative. You are CORRECT!!

[TwoBits]

Just to clarify: This is not the case in NFHS. The defense may only use the orange portion of the base if a thrown from foul ground or if an errant or missed throw pulls the defensive player into foul ground. 8-10-2.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by TwoBits

Just to clarify: This is not the case in NFHS. The defense may only use the orange portion of the base if a thrown from foul ground or if an errant or missed throw pulls the defensive player into foul ground. 8-10-2.

Seems to me that is exactly what everyone stated.

[TwoBits]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Seems to me that is exactly what everyone stated.

The thread started with the situation of a batted ball bouncing off F3 into foul territory. According to NFHS rules, the use of the orange bag by the defense is only mentioned along with a throw by the defense.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by TwoBits

Just to clarify: This is not the case in NFHS. The defense may only use the orange portion of the base if a thrown from foul ground or if an errant or missed throw pulls the defensive player into foul ground. 8-10-2.

Editorial comment: NFHS needs to get serious about the double base, or just forget it entirely. They have been sneaking up on it for years. They finally moved it into the rule book proper, but left it as by state association adoption. I don't know if that means they also do not think it completely through, but if your interp is correct for NFHS (I agree it is how the rule reads), then I guess they want the players crossing paths in this situation.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Editorial comment: NFHS needs to get serious about the double base, or just forget it entirely. They have been sneaking up on it for years. They finally moved it into the rule book proper, but left it as by state association adoption. I don't know if that means they also do not think it completely through, but if your interp is correct for NFHS (I agree it is how the rule reads), then I guess they want the players crossing paths in this situation.

I wouldn't doubt that the reason the Fed is slow moving to completely accept it is because they fear "forcing" schools to buy new equipment and the thousand excuses why it cannot happen here or there.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Editorial comment: NFHS needs to get serious about the double base, or just forget it entirely. They have been sneaking up on it for years. They finally moved it into the rule book proper, but left it as by state association adoption. I don't know if that means they also do not think it completely through, but if your interp is correct for NFHS (I agree it is how the rule reads), then I guess they want the players crossing paths in this situation.

Let's write a rule, preferably copied verbatim from PONY except saying "foul-side, outside or colored" instead of "orange" and add it to the list WMB was going to present.

[bobbrix]

Hi,

To date, the Softball Canada rule book does not include the "... fielder can use the orange part when making a play from foul territory ..." rule.

Note, however, that I was at a mechanics clinic Saturday where the clinician mentioned that one of our provinces, British Columbia, is now deviating via special operating rule and allows that play from the foul side.

I guess the hope is the B-R will use the white bag to avoid a collision.

If I had a vote, I'd remove that foul side provision.

Regards, bobbrix

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by bobbrix

If I had a vote, I'd remove that foul side provision.

Why? .....

[bobbrix]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Why? .....

I haven't seen the play used, since we don't allow it ... but, if the intent is to reduce collisions, then does it achieve that goal?

It seems to me the "more skilled" players would actually use it for that purpose because they can think ahead based on at-a-glance situations, but for the younger ones it would just lead to them getting in the way more often.

I have this picture in my head of B-R barreling down to first base and F3 not paying enough attention to where B-R is headed (and vice versa) ... more and more occurrences of obstruction/interference arguments because of lazy F3's ???

After all these years we still have trouble training people on the initial rules for the double base ... now they're just adding more scenarios and thereby adding more confusion.

I'm willing to be converted!

Am I wrong?

Over ... bobbrix