INT Interp
ASA Girls FP
R1 on 3B with 1 out. B2 has 3-2 count and hits a pop up near the on deck circle. F5 can catch this fly ball with ordinary effort. (Everyone in the park knows this). R1 while off the base INT's with F5's play. (No question about the INT). Ball lands ands settles in foul ground. Ruling 1: R1 is out for INT B2 stays at bat with 3-2 count. Ruling 2: R1 is out for INT B2 is out because the ball could be caught with ordinary effort. Rule 8.7.L Exception would support Ruling 2 POE 33.A.d supports Ruling 1 How say ye? |
IMHO you can't get more than one out on the play. R1 is out and a foul on the batter...
|
Quote:
ASA Rule 8-7-J-1 NOTE. Since the interference was with a routine fly ball over foul territory that could be caught with ordinary effort, the runner is out AND the BR is out. |
Quote:
(Not to mention that it's supported by rule that this SHOULD be 2 outs!) |
Quote:
I recall we went over the POE 33.d thing a month or two ago, because I had something similar to this happen. Now it seems that this section of Rule 8 contradicts with POE 33.d. Or is it attempting to simply further specify? The way the book reads now, I could see a coach having an argument for either ruling in a protest, by using one section or the other. |
The difference is the fly ball can be caught (in the umpire's judgment) with ordinary effort.
|
There would be almost no evidence that a "double play" could be possible. I call the runner out and keep the batter at 3-2.
|
Quote:
Besides, if you do not rule the BR out, what do you do with the rule cited above? Ignore it? |
I agree with Dakota here. R1 had to intentionally IF since the foul ball was near the on deck circle, obviously trying to preserve B2's at bat. There would have been one out when this rutine ball was cought and a possible double play with R1 that far off the base. Why give them the benefit of only one out?
|
I have 2 outs as well. R1 is out for the interference. Clear cut. BR is out because of the exception. The possibility of a double play is irrelevant.
If I can judge whether a fly ball is caught with ordinary effort for the purposes of an IF, I can certainly judge it for the purposes of enforcing this rule as well. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
As relating to interference by a retired runner to prevent a double play, where we can rule a second out, the possibility of a double play in the OP is not relevant, since the interference, in all liklihood was not committed intentionally to prevent a double play. It was probably a running mistake, unless it was men's slow pitch, where it probably was an attempt to prevent a catch as opposed to preventing a double play. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:48pm. |