The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jul 20, 2007, 04:47pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Houghton, U.P., Michigan
Posts: 9,953
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobbi Stevens
So just image for one minute, the umpire saw the player deliberately knock the ball out of my glove, then this would be interference, therefore he would be given out ? Yes ??

would the umpire then judge that i would of also got the runner out at 2nd ?

I personally felt that i would of got all three.
Yes, the umpire probably could have given you the out at 2B, and maybe 1B, though the out at 1B had more variables and would make it tougher for the ump to be "certain".
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jul 20, 2007, 05:03pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4
Is there a rule about runners knocking balls out of gloves, or a rule that cover this incident ?? So i can look it up ???
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jul 20, 2007, 05:59pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobbi Stevens
Is there a rule about runners knocking balls out of gloves, or a rule that cover this incident ?? So i can look it up ???
We don't know which rule book you are using, but for example the runner rules in ASA are in Rule 8, Section 7, starting around sub section L. Other rule books have similar sections, usually titled "runner is out" or something similar.

Note: the out at 2nd could be because the tagged runner is now out and as a "retired" runner "deliberately" attempted to prevent a double play. The triple play would be a real stretch on the umpire's part.
__________________
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.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jul 22, 2007, 09:40pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Sherman, TX
Posts: 4,387
As an aside, "would've" does not equal "would of," but rather "would have." Just a pet peeve of mine.
__________________
Scott


It's a small world, but I wouldn't want to have to paint it.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 23, 2007, 09:16am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 106
As long as we are providing grammar corrections, how about triple play, not tripple play.
It takes a village!!
__________________
MCPO(SW) USN(Ret.)
Softball Addict
Mississippi Gulf Coast
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 23, 2007, 09:42am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
Come on you guys, ease up.
__________________
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.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 23, 2007, 10:12am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Twin Cities MN
Posts: 8,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by emaxos
As long as we are providing grammar corrections, how about triple play, not tripple play.
It takes a village!!
I was going to suggest trippple play.
__________________
Tom
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 23, 2007, 10:49am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Houghton, U.P., Michigan
Posts: 9,953
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dakota
I was going to suggest trippple play.
Good call, Dakota.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 23, 2007, 01:44pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Sherman, TX
Posts: 4,387
Quote:
Originally Posted by emaxos
As long as we are providing grammar corrections, how about triple play, not tripple play.
It takes a village!!
Oh...trust me. I could've gone on and on. The incorrect spellings, though, could have been accidental. However, most people today actually believe that "would of" is really what folks are saying when they mean "would've."
__________________
Scott


It's a small world, but I wouldn't want to have to paint it.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 23, 2007, 02:06pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Back in TX, formerly Seattle area
Posts: 1,279
If it was SP, a "Ripple" play would have been more apt.
__________________
John
An ucking fidiot
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jul 24, 2007, 12:18pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 283
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobbi Stevens
Is there a rule about runners knocking balls out of gloves, or a rule that cover this incident ?? So i can look it up ???
Note that the rule will not specifically mention a runner knocking the ball out of the glove.

If runner does this deliberately, then it is interference, and the interference rules apply. "Deliberately" is entirely in the judgement of the umpire. If the runner swipes at your glove with her hand (ala A. Rod.), that's pretty obviously deliberate. But if the runner simply runs hard into the glove with no other motion to dislodge the ball, then it's probably your bad for failing to control the ball during the tag.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jul 25, 2007, 02:51am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4
Thanks for getting the thread back on track.

He was a new player and he quite clearly pushed the glove out of the way to stop me tagging him. A big argument kick off after the game about it, between the sides and email have started flying around. I was just looking for some rule to quote to end this argument
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jul 25, 2007, 10:17am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 283
In that case, all you can quote is the rules on interference as mentioned by previous posters. But because they don't explicitly mention that interference includes deliberately knocking the ball out of the glove, the people you're trying to convince may not find this compelling.

On such a play, though, it is entirely the judgement of the umpire that matters, and there are two judgements that need to be made. The first is whether there was interference. If what you described as "he quite clearly pushed the glove out of the way" is accurate (this is very subjective, btw), then it sounds like interference to me. If there was interference, then the second judgement is the likely outcome of the play had there not been interference. In your case, a double play seemed obvious, so if interference had been called, two outs would be the minimum penalty. But a triple play is never as obvious, and the umpire would have to be convinced that such an outcome was likely before giving a three-out penalty for the interference.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Runner stopped advancing Saltydog Baseball 11 Mon Jun 07, 2004 04:06am
Mercy/Slaughter Rule - game continued then stopped digher38 Softball 14 Wed Aug 13, 2003 12:22pm
Play-by-Play Commentary FC IC Basketball 2 Sat Dec 21, 2002 12:28am
clock stopped for a split sec devdog69 Basketball 4 Fri Jan 18, 2002 01:19am
CBS play-by-play announcers: should they all be fired? David Clausi Basketball 6 Mon Mar 27, 2000 11:56pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:24pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1