Thoughts on this play...

[Andy]

I just returned from two weeks in Park City, UT for the Triple Crown "World" Series. Great weather, decent softball, saw some old umpire friends, and met some new ones.

Had one interesting play this last week that I would like some opinions on:

16u, ASA rules, R1 on third, two outs, two strikes on the batter. I am BU.

Pitch is in the dirt and swung at for strike three. F2 does not catch the ball, but blocks it out in front of her. BR, seeing that the pitch was in the dirt, starts for first. The ball deflects off of F2 and into BR, who unintentionally kicks the ball down the first base line. F2 jumps out in front of the BR and starts toward the ball. Before F2 gets to the point where she can physically reach the ball and make a play, she intentionally (in my judgement) moves to block the BR from continuing to first base. F2 then takes a few steps to reach the ball and throws to first base to put the BR out. My PU partner has no call.

I'm interested in hearing your thoughts and opinions before I say what I called on the field.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by Andy

16u, ASA rules, R1 on third, two outs, two strikes on the batter. I am BU.

Pitch is in the dirt and swung at for strike three. F2 does not catch the ball, but blocks it out in front of her. BR, seeing that the pitch was in the dirt, starts for first. The ball deflects off of F2 and into BR, who unintentionally kicks the ball down the first base line...

Nothing else matters. Dead ball. BR out. ASA 8-2-F-6. But it was your partner's call.

[BretMan]

Unfortunately, the ASA interpretation here is that the batter-runner is out for interference with the uncaught third strike. Her intent doesn't even come into the picture. The protection for the defense is absolute on this play- she has either interfered or she has not.

At the instant of interference, the B/R is out and the ball is dead. So all the other stuff you mentioned is moot.

And I really, really don't like this this interpretation!

My personal opinion is that if the pitch is deflected into the B/R's path in such a manner that she cannot possibly avoid it, the same standard should apply as when a batted ball is deflected into the path of a runner who then accidentally contacts the ball- ie: no interference, live ball, play on.

The defense has had their opportunity to make the play (catch the pitch) and has blown it. Now the B/R is out due to some random bounce that is impossible to avoid as she otherwise legally advances toward first base.

But that is just that- my opinion. ASA has issued a ruling here that goes against my personal opinion and I am bound to enforce the rule as they want it- interference, dead ball, batter-runner out.

[azbigdawg]

I hoe your trip was good, Andy


Dead ball, batter out on the interference....

[greymule]

I don't like this rule, either. Even though I'm assuming that the BR must actively do something to interfere, like kick the ball unintentionally. If strike 3 in the dirt is swung on and missed, bounces off F2, and rebounds into the BR who is standing still in the box, I would not call INT.

[whiskers_ump]

Originally Posted by Andy

I just returned from two weeks in Park City, UT for the Triple Crown "World" Series. Great weather, decent softball, saw some old umpire friends, and met some new ones.

Had one interesting play this last week that I would like some opinions on:

16u, ASA rules, R1 on third, two outs, two strikes on the batter. I am BU.

Pitch is in the dirt and swung at for strike three. F2 does not catch the ball, but blocks it out in front of her. BR, seeing that the pitch was in the dirt, starts for first. The ball deflects off of F2 and into BR, who unintentionally kicks the ball down the first base line. F2 jumps out in front of the BR and starts toward the ball. Before F2 gets to the point where she can physically reach the ball and make a play, she intentionally (in my judgement) moves to block the BR from continuing to first base. F2 then takes a few steps to reach the ball and throws to first base to put the BR out. My PU partner has no call.

I'm interested in hearing your thoughts and opinions before I say what I called on the field.

Andy,

A couple of guys I worked the AFA 18U Nats with were in Utah earlier. Did you meet a Romero, or Griffin?

[Andy]

Darrell - Trip was great, weather was fantastic!

Glen - I seem to recall those names from the pre-tournament meetings, but did not work with either of them or meet them. Are they from Texas?

As for the play....well, I really blew this one....I called Obstruction on the catcher for her actions prior to attempting to recover the ball and awarded the BR first and R1 home

The defensive coach wasn't very happy with the call, but his main gripe was that the BR was out of the running lane.

When I explained the call to my partner and the UIC later, they both agreed with it...guess I will have to contact them and explain what the correct call should have been.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Andy

Darrell - Trip was great, weather was fantastic!

Glen - I seem to recall those names from the pre-tournament meetings, but did not work with either of them or meet them. Are they from Texas?

As for the play....well, I really blew this one....I called Obstruction on the catcher for her actions prior to attempting to recover the ball and awarded the BR first and R1 home

The defensive coach wasn't very happy with the call, but his main gripe was that the BR was out of the running lane.

When I explained the call to my partner and the UIC later, they both agreed with it...guess I will have to contact them and explain what the correct call should have been.

This is a tough call and one which does not fall in line with the "common sense" theory. Your call does not leap off the page as a "boy, did he blow that one." It makes some sense, just doesn't agree with the rules.

[azbigdawg]

Originally Posted by Andy

Darrell - Trip was great, weather was fantastic!

Glen - I seem to recall those names from the pre-tournament meetings, but did not work with either of them or meet them. Are they from Texas?

As for the play....well, I really blew this one....I called Obstruction on the catcher for her actions prior to attempting to recover the ball and awarded the BR first and R1 home

The defensive coach wasn't very happy with the call, but his main gripe was that the BR was out of the running lane.

When I explained the call to my partner and the UIC later, they both agreed with it...guess I will have to contact them and explain what the correct call should have been.

Hey..read Mike's post....I dont think this was one to hang your head over... YOU were there..and you know what youre doing..this is one that can be argued over...... and a ruling from the national staff may prove us wrong.....

[JPRempe]

This situation reminds me of another ruling about a runner who has already scored and interfering with a throw (terrible up the 1B line type of throw) and awarding an out, but maybe my mind isn't exactly recalling this one correctly (and of course, my rule book is about 15 miles away at the moment)...

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by JPRempe

This situation reminds me of another ruling about a runner who has already scored and interfering with a throw (terrible up the 1B line type of throw) and awarding an out, but maybe my mind isn't exactly recalling this one correctly (and of course, my rule book is about 15 miles away at the moment)...

Speaking ASA

It would only be interference if the former runner had actually interfered with the defense's ability to make a play on another runner.