You keep saying that, but provide no rule. "Being stupid" is not against the rules. And, if the correct ruling is foul ball, then it was not stupid at all, was it?

Case play?? Rule?? Authoritative ruling of any kind??

Do you penalize the defense for contacting a ball in foul territory to keep the BR from getting a base hit? If not, why not? It is the exact same scenario, just a different team touching the ball for a different reason based on supposition.

Wow! I created a monster with this post! Thanks for all your passionate and thoughtful replies. Personally I'm going to call it foul ball but hold my nose. (I also find it difficult to penalize someone for being clever--and the batter-runner in this fictitious case is one smart cookie!)

The "monsters" are often the ones we learn the most from. The cut & dry when 3 - 4 of us all answer the same way in an hour are very useful to the questioner and just as useful; but teach in a different way. :cool:

In my judgement, a BR who stops a ball from rolling into fair territory has displayed poor sportsmanship and I would call them out.

POE 49 "The values of softball competition are based on sporting behavior and fair play. Coaches and players are expected and trusted with these values."

Is that the proper penalty for sportsmanship? What penalty is called for if someone (in ASA) has committed an unsporting act?

While I agree that it's not fair and not proper, that's just my opinion. Is it really not fair? Mike's supposition is very good, in that we don't penalize the defense for making a play on a ball in foul territory that may well go fair. Here's a for instance: slow roller down 1B line. Pitcher, catcher, 1B, whoever else are gathered around. The instant the ball is foul one (or more) swipe at the ball, make contact and bat it foul with their glove.

Of course they can do this because the rule book infers they can do that. But there's nothing specific that says they can — just like there's nothing specific that says the offense can't contact a ball that is foul.

only in Canada eh?
 

Well.... in the Quirky country of Canada, the casebook Rule 8 ,case 231 gives the following-"The batter hits a pitched ball on the ground towards first. The batted ball is touched by the batter-runner in his advance toward first The touching is :
a) intentional
b) accidental, ball on fair ground, hasn't passed an IF
c) accidental on foul ground
d) accidental, on fair ground, has passed an IF

RULING:
a)and b)-Dead ball, Out for interference.:eek:
c) Foul ball, no interference:)
d) Fair Ball, no interference, unless deliberate contact was
made. :rolleyes:

Maybe we should ask the question, "When is a live ball a foul ball?" It may be in foul territory but it is not considered foul until the ball stops or is touched.
Could the rule of the ball touching the batter when the batter is out of the batter's box be implemented to call the batter out???

Batter prevents ball from rolling fair
 

It would sure appear to me that there should be no difference in the treatment of offense and defense in this type of situation. If we're going to call the BR/runner out if they make contact with a ball that "appears" to be rolling toward fair territory, then you must award the base to the BR on the bunt/batted ball rolling down the chalk line that slips into foul territory and is immediately grabbed/slapped/touched by the defense. There is no discernible difference in my mind. Be consistent, gentlemen, that's all we're asked to be.

By the way, John ;) , the "implication" is in the book, but the "inferrence" is being made by all of us.

I hope that item "C" is a misprint. You can't have a foul ball on a batted ball that is touch in fair territory. You can have a dead ball situation, but never a foul ball or am I missing something here.

There is no discernible difference in my mind.

Fielders are supposed to field the ball and do so to their own advantage. Batters and runners are not supposed to touch or guide or interfere with batted balls.

However, if in ASA batter-runners or runners are indeed permitted to pick up foul balls on their way to 1B, that rule doesn't bother me particularly. But if I were in charge of ASA rules, I would include the following words from another code:

"It is interference by a batter or runner when he intentionally deflects the course of a foul ball in any manner." The interpretation under that code is that the ball had to have a chance to become fair.

I agree with the posters who say that a team should not be able to benefit from USC. Worse than kicking a foul ball, a BR should not be able to commit deliberate interference and benefit his team—but in a certain situation in ASA, he can.

Well.... in the Quirky country of Canada, the casebook Rule 8 ,case 231 gives the following-"The batter hits a pitched ball on the ground towards first. The batted ball is touched by the batter-runner in his advance toward first The touching is :
a) intentional
b) accidental, ball on fair ground, hasn't passed an IF
c) accidental on fair ground
d) accidental, on fair ground, has passed an IF

RULING:
a)and b)-Dead ball, Out for interference.
c) Foul ball, no interference
d) Fair Ball, no interference, unless deliberate contact was
made.

Obviously answer (c) is not correct.

Incidentally, is there a rule in ASA that prevents the following?:

Batter hits a roller down the 3B line. The ball is two inches foul but is moving toward the line. F5 charges, but before he can pick it up, the 3B coach beats him to the ball by diving and touching the ball.

Substitute "runner from 3B" for "coach." Same thing?

If these actions are legal, ASA has some rule changes to make.

I'm assuming the correction above...

Anyway, the problem is that the ASA book very carefully inserts "fair" into the interference rules on a runner with a batted ball, as in "makes contact with a fair batted ball..." in 8-2-F-4.

ASA makes no provision for intent here; it doesn't matter as far as the ASA book is concerned.

Contact with a batted ground ball in foul territory by a player is definitionally a foul ball (1-FOUL BALL-C). The rule makes no distinction between an offensive or defensive player.

You are correct. Thanks, for catching my blunder. I've edited my post.

You know how it drives you nuts when coaches make up their own rules?

Another scenario. A bounding ground ball in foul territory is grabbed by the base coach. However, based on this thread's "assumption" that "the ball could possible come back into fair territory", you better be prepared to call somebody out.