|
Sun Sep 10, 2006, 11:21pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
What's this?
Batter swings and misses, pitch hits either the catcher or the ground and bounces up. Batter hits the ball on her back-swing. Ball rebounds off the catcher and into the infield. Both teams play this as a hit ball.
What is it really?
__________________
Tom 
|
|
Sun Sep 10, 2006, 11:23pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'd call it a dead ball. Once the batter swung and missed, it's a strike. When It was hit on the backswing, it's a dead ball.
|
|
Mon Sep 11, 2006, 06:38am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball. Last edited by IRISHMAFIA; Mon Sep 11, 2006 at 09:55am.
|
|
Mon Sep 11, 2006, 07:32am
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm assuming when you wrote "backswing" you meant the action of a player who has already swung at a pitch and is now bringing the bat back.
If this is the case, I can't call it a foul ball. It's a swinging strike followed by a bit of unintentional interference by the batter. If it's strike three, the batter is out and the ball is dead. If runners are attempting to steal on the play, you might have a good case for calling interference too.
|
|
Mon Sep 11, 2006, 08:17am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I thought that for interference to be called by retired runner, we need to have an intentional act. ASA 8.7.P NFHS 8.6.18 Also, Irish is correct about the ruling being a foul ball / dead ball. ASA 7.6.K exception #3 NFHS 7.2.3
__________________
Mark NFHS, NCAA, NAFA "If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?" Anton Chigurh - "No Country for Old Men"
|
|
Mon Sep 11, 2006, 09:21am
|
|||
|
|||
|
A few random thoughts...
If this play is to be ruled a foul ball, then we obviously have no interference on a potential steal situation because runners can't attempt a steal on a foul ball. One problem I see in ruling this a foul ball instead of a swing and a miss is that the batter may have saved himself/herself from a strikeout by hitting the ball (albeit inadvertently) on the backswing. The pitcher gets cheated out of a strikeout if there were already two strikes on the batter. Maybe we have an illegally batted ball here? The batter has, in effect, swung twice at the pitch. Last edited by John Robertson; Mon Sep 11, 2006 at 09:23am.
|
|
Mon Sep 11, 2006, 09:57am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I don't think that is what most of us would rule, but that's what it says.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
|
|
Mon Sep 11, 2006, 10:16am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
 But, that is what I meant... or more generally, natural movement of the bat after the swing attempt.
__________________
Tom
|
|
Mon Sep 11, 2006, 10:20am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Maybe it should, but note the rule does recognize the possiblity of there already being 2 strikes on the batter with the reference to 7-6-L.
__________________
Tom
|
|
Mon Sep 11, 2006, 10:25am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
Tom
|
|
Mon Sep 11, 2006, 06:24pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Which would still make it a foul ball the second time it hit the catcher.
__________________
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.
|
|
Tue Sep 12, 2006, 05:10pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Wouldn't ASA rule 7 section 4E apply here?
4E says, "a strike is called for each foul ball when the batter has fewer than 2 strikes" which is followed by F (slowpitch) then a note. The Note states : NOTE E-F: if a pitched ball is swung at and missed, then hit on the follow through, it is a strike and a dead ball. The way i read that, if it's a 3rd strike, its still strike 3 dead ball. Batter out.
|
|
Tue Sep 12, 2006, 11:15pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yes, it would. However, that is for calling a strike. What happens when you rule the batter out on strikes the the coach protests citing 7.6.K.3 and Effect where it specifically states that this is a foul ball. And we all know, a foul ball is not a strike when the batter already has two.
It seems there is a contradiction.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
|
|
Wed Sep 13, 2006, 10:04am
|
|||
|
|||
|
It took us awhile (must be the off season for a lot of folks)... but we've finally gotten to the dilema on this situation.
Less that 2 strikes, there is no contradiction. But with 2 strikes, there is. Personally, I'm going with foul ball and letting the protest committee sort it out.
__________________
Tom
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
