Runner on base hit with batted ball

[drh898]

Bases loaded, batter hits fair gourndball down 3rd base line that hits runner standing on 3rd base.

1) Is runner out because runner loses protection of the base since runner is forced to move

2) Is runner safe because no matter what as long as runner is on the base the runner cannot be called out when hit by a batted ball

3) Is the ball dead upon hitting runner and, if so, what happens next?

[JPRempe]

Originally Posted by drh898

Bases loaded, batter hits fair gourndball down 3rd base line that hits runner standing on 3rd base.

1) Is runner out because runner loses protection of the base since runner is forced to move

2) Is runner safe because no matter what as long as runner is on the base the runner cannot be called out when hit by a batted ball

3) Is the ball dead upon hitting runner and, if so, what happens next?

I thought there was a thread about his exact issue not too long ago, but maybe it was on another board.

If the runner did not intentionally mean to get hit (like stick his leg out and intentionally deflect the ball), then it's a dead ball situation, B/R is given/awarded 1B, and any runners forced are forced up a base.

[Az.Ump]

Bases loaded, batter hits fair gourndball down 3rd base line that hits runner standing on 3rd base.

1) Is runner out because runner loses protection of the base since runner is forced to move. No

2) Is runner safe because no matter what as long as runner is on the base the runner cannot be called out when hit by a batted ball. Maybe, could be out on intentional interference.

3) Is the ball dead upon hitting runner and, if so, what happens next? Maybe see RS 44


44. RUNNER HIT BY A FAIR BATTED BALL.
A. While in Contact With the Base. A runner who is hit by a fair batted ball
while in contact with the base should not be called out unless the act is
intentional. The ball remains live, or becomes immediately dead, depending
on the closest defensive player. When the closest defensive player
is in front of the base that the runner is in contact with, the ball remains
live. However, when the closest defensive player is behind the base, the
ball is dead. Should the ball be ruled dead and the batter awarded a
base hit, only runners forced to advance because the batter was placed
on first base shall advance one base.

Paul

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by Az.Ump

2) Is runner safe because no matter what as long as runner is on the base the runner cannot be called out when hit by a batted ball. Maybe, could be out on intentional interference.

Intentional or not, interference may be the ruling. If a defensive player had the opportunity to make a play, the runner is out, regardless of whether or not they're on the bag. What the rules supplement didn't state about the potential dead ball is why the ball would be dead: ball hit runner, fielder behind runner had a chance, interference, dead ball, runner out.

In question #1 of this sitch, it's important to keep in mind that while they are "forced" to advance, the book does not really say WHEN they're forced to advance, ground ball or not. So all of the "no" answers that were posted are correct.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

Intentional or not, interference may be the ruling. If a defensive player had the opportunity to make a play, the runner is out, regardless of whether or not they're on the bag. What the rules supplement didn't state about the potential dead ball is why the ball would be dead: ball hit runner, fielder behind runner had a chance, interference, dead ball, runner out.

In question #1 of this sitch, it's important to keep in mind that while they are "forced" to advance, the book does not really say WHEN they're forced to advance, ground ball or not. So all of the "no" answers that were posted are correct.

Intent is required here. A player is not forced to vacate a base in order to avoid an interference call. Otherwise that could possible put the runner in jeopardy. The ball is not dead because of interference. The ball is dead because the defense didn't have a chance to make a play. This is similar to an umpire getting hit by the ball if he is in front of a fielder. You kill it and award the batter first base and advance any runners forced. There is no out on this play unless the runner intentionally interfered.

One more thing. The reason the rule supplement didn't state that the ball was dead due to interference is because that's not why its dead. Look at rule 8-1-E-6. It says "When a fair batted ball....touches a runner in contact with a base: EFFECT: The runner is not out. The ball is live or dead depending on the position of the fielder closest to the base."

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

Intentional or not, interference may be the ruling. If a defensive player had the opportunity to make a play, the runner is out, regardless of whether or not they're on the bag. What the rules supplement didn't state about the potential dead ball is why the ball would be dead: ball hit runner, fielder behind runner had a chance, interference, dead ball, runner out.

In question #1 of this sitch, it's important to keep in mind that while they are "forced" to advance, the book does not really say WHEN they're forced to advance, ground ball or not. So all of the "no" answers that were posted are correct.

Ugh ... you seem to know what you're talking about 90% of the time ... just enough for some rookie to come on here, read what you said, believe you, and then rule incorrectly. This rule is VERY easily worded and readable. Intent is ABSOLUTELY required for you to rule interference in this case.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Ugh ... you seem to know what you're talking about 90% of the time ... just enough for some rookie to come on here, read what you said, believe you, and then rule incorrectly. This rule is VERY easily worded and readable. Intent is ABSOLUTELY required for you to rule interference in this case.

Hmmm... Yep, you're right. I accidentally mixed in 8-7-J-1. Blarg.

[drh898]

Thanks, guys, for your insight. It really helps my umpiring education.

[drh898]

Ok, so if there was no intentional interference (in ump's thinking) by runner on base and the fielder may have had a chance to make a play the ball is dead, batter awarded 1st, runners advance 1 base. If the ball hits the runner (still no intent) fielder had no chance on play (in ump's thinking) ball is live? What if the ball hits the runner (no interference) but causes ball to change direction enabling fielder to make a play somewhere. Seems the offense is penalized for something that was not intentional interference or is it tough luck? Or maybe I'm missing something?

By the way, thank you for letting me bounce these things off you. Plays come up sometimes that seem in the grey area and I know you guys have the answers, so thanks.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by drh898

Ok, so if there was no intentional interference (in ump's thinking) by runner on base and the fielder may have had a chance to make a play the ball is dead, batter awarded 1st, runners advance 1 base. If the ball hits the runner (still no intent) fielder had no chance on play (in ump's thinking) ball is live? What if the ball hits the runner (no interference) but causes ball to change direction enabling fielder to make a play somewhere. Seems the offense is penalized for something that was not intentional interference or is it tough luck? Or maybe I'm missing something?

If the nearest defender is behind the runner when hit by the FAIR batted ball, the ball is dead, the BR is awarded 1B and only runners forced move up one base. If the defender was not behind the runner when hit by the FAIR batted ball, the ball remains live.

If contact with the FAIR batted ball was intentional regardless of the location of the defender, the runner is out for INT. If the umpire believes the action was an attempt to prevent a double play (and this play must be available), the R/BR who, in the umpire's judgement, would have been out had the INT not occurred is retired.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by drh898

Ok, so if there was no intentional interference (in ump's thinking) by runner on base and the fielder may have had a chance to make a play the ball is dead, batter awarded 1st, runners advance 1 base.

FORCED runners advance 1 base, but otherwise ... correct.

If the ball hits the runner (still no intent) fielder had no chance on play (in ump's thinking) ball is live?

Correct.

What if the ball hits the runner (no interference) but causes ball to change direction enabling fielder to make a play somewhere. Seems the offense is penalized for something that was not intentional interference or is it tough luck?

They aren't really being penalized for anything... this is just like the ball taking an odd bounce off the base itself that allows defense to make a play they otherwise wouldn't have had a chance on.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

If contact with the FAIR batted ball was intentional regardless of the location of the defender, the runner is out for INT. If the umpire believes the action was an attempt to prevent a double play (and this play must be available), the R/BR who, in the umpire's judgement, would have been out had the INT not occurred is retired.

...but wouldn't the additional runner declared out be the immediate succeeding runner regardless of which runner the defense was trying to put out? When the interference by a runner occurs before they are put out we always get the succeeding runner. If it occurs after they are put out, we get the runner closest to home. Since the runner was not put out prior to the interference, the succeeding runner should be declared out. The only time I can find where we are to get the runner being played on out, is when a ball is blocked by offensive equipment.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by rwest

...but wouldn't the additional runner declared out be the immediate succeeding runner regardless of which runner the defense was trying to put out? When the interference by a runner occurs before they are put out we always get the succeeding runner. If it occurs after they are put out, we get the runner closest to home. Since the runner was not put out prior to the interference, the succeeding runner should be declared out. The only time I can find where we are to get the runner being played on out, is when a ball is blocked by offensive equipment.

Yep, you are correct. I don't like the ruling and it defies common sense, but it is right there in black and white.