New Rule On This?
 

I was talking to a coach today and he gave me a situation that I thought was pretty straightforward until he told me he was given a different opinion by a UIC from Keller.

ASA. The batter hits a grounder to the first baseman. She bobbles it, and then trips going to first. In her haste to beat the BR, she drops the ball, picks it up in her bare hand and then touches first with her glove, before the BR gets to the base.

I told him I would have called the BR out, under these described circumstances. He then told me that the UIC told him this was a greatly debated topic and the Rules Committee came up with an result of safe on this play. Is this true? If so, what is the logic behind the decision? I know I'm probably overlooking it, but the only rule even close to this, that I can find, is 8-7-C talking about a force out on a runner.

If she had touched 1B with her foot, what would the call be?

I have an out on the BR.

I hope this doesn't end up having to be included on the MYTHS list. :eek:

I have BR OUT. What's the rationale for anything different? ( hadta ask :p ) A force out is a force out is a force out ...

What "rules committee"?

This may be some local yahoos, but it certainly wasn't the ASA "rules committee". The ASA Rules Committee is a group of voting council members, commissioners, player reps and an member of the NUS alike, assigned to such a committee for the National Convention. There sole responsibility is to discuss, approve, disapprove or defer to another committee a previously proposed rule and provide that recommendation to the council for consideration.

Only the NUS and/or Dir. of Umpires office can provide interpretations due to a miswording of a rule or a circumstance involving a rule that was not anticipated by the author(s) of a rule.

She can touch the bag with her nose as long as she has control of the ball in either her hand or glove.The glove or hand with ball must be off the ground though.

Jeff
NFHS Umpire
NCAA Umpire
ASA Umpire

WOW!
I would call an out in the force play described in the OP.
If an out on the described force play was not called, then how could a "routine" force play at 1st (or any base) be called?
Sounds to me like the Rules Committee needs to better understand the situation.
I wonder if there are any current or ex-umpires on the Committe.
Sam

Sam, I think you missed the point of Mike's post. There is no such "Rules Committee" in ASA which generates rulings. Only the ASA Director of Umpires or the National Umpire Staff can make such interpretations.

Bottom line, whomever this "UIC from Keller" is pulled the entire topic and alleged ruling out of his a$$. No such official ruling exists.

That same play was question #24 on the 2006 ASA test.

The answer was that yes, tagging 1B with an empty glove with the ball in the other hand is indeed a "force play."

Incidentally, since ASA has clarified that the "force" is reinstated when the BR retreats toward home plate, I can't think of any difference whatsoever between the out 1B and a force play at another base. If that is true, then ASA (unlike, in particular, OBR) can legitimately call the out at 1B a force play.

THAT was what I was hoping to hear. I couldn't believe the ruling changed and no one had talked about this at all. I have been really slow in getting my Case Book this year, so I couldn't research it myself.



I do believe you are right. This guy is supposed to be pretty sharp and schedules for several different parks.

major assumptions
 

We seem to be making some major assumptions:
- the UIC and coach communicated clearly about the play and ruling
- the coach explained the play to Rick the same way as to the UIC
- what topic was "greatly debated"