Need help SP question

[oppool]

Hope Mike or one of you who do some slow-pitch can help me out with this.

Question from ASA 2002 test question

39. In a Coed game, R1 on 3B, an outfielder is positioned near 2B and catches a ground ball and retires B2 at 1B and scores R1

A. Legal play, no restriction on defense
B. The umpire should have corrected the positioning prior to
a pitch
C. B and D or correct
D. At the conclusion of the play and upon discovery before a
pitch, allow the offensive coach the option of accepting
the result of the play, or a no pitch that nullifies the
play

Ok I believed the correct answer was B but told by another umpire that has a key to the test that the correct answer is C. I have been through the book many times and dont see anywhere where there is an EFFECT situation on this play so if someone could tell me where I could find it I would fully appreciate it


Thanks

Don

[kissmyump]

IMHO the answer should be A. The ASA rule book is written for National Tournament play. ASA allows local leagues to alter the rule book as they see fit. This is where problems occur when umps try to either make up rules to fit the occasion or get mixed up with their local rules. In the slowpitch leagues that i umpire we have a 200' line that the outfielders must stay behind and infielders must stay on the clay. If you went to a national ASA co-ed tournament and tried to apply this rule you would not be taken very seriously as an umpire. You can't find an EFFECT because there isn't one. Since there is no 200' foot rule in ASA, IMHO the outfielders can position themselves pretty much anywhere in fair territory they want to. Umpires are not coaches so we can't really tell them where to play. You could be NEAR 2nd base and still be technically in the outfield area. So answer B would not be correct. Answer D sounds like a LOCAL rule to me meant to through us off. IMHO the only logical answer would be A. Lots of room for a nice discussion here.
kissmyump

[whiskers_ump]

Don,

I would think that the correct answer would be c.

I would apply Rule 1 definition of Infielder, and
I think CB 1-72B. I always try and mark the answers
with the references when I take the test. However, I
could easily be wrong, don't do slow pitch and have
not in several years. Rule 1 - Infielder is also a
2002 Rule Change.

Am I guessing on this, yes.....

glen

[kissmyump]

In ASA an outfielder could be positioned in the outfield grass NEAR 2nd base. Ball reaches plate and is hit sharply up the middle. Outfielder legally runs up into infield area scoops up ball bang bang play at 1st slow batter runner is out. At time of the hit outfielder was legal. So answer B is not right. Therefore answer C absolutely is not right. There is no mention in the 2002 ASA rule book about giving the offensive coach in this situation a choice of anything. So answer D is wrong. Like I said, the only correct answer is A. IMHO

Anybody in this discussion board ever done an ASA Co-ed National? If so, How did your UIC handle this situation?

[oppool]

Ok rule book states there must be 4 infielder 2 male 2 female and for appeal or infield fly rule they are the player that is position at the time of the pitch around the base. It states that you can not play 5 in the infield area which is basically what this question states. At the recent National and Metro umpire meeting the National staff did say if this was to happen the umpire should correct it. Merle Butler stated the 4 outfielder should be in a line in the outfield which pretty much kills having a rover position.

As stated though in the original post I do not find any rule on this that has an Effect if after a play happens. My thought is if the umpire doesnt catch it in time before a pitch it was just a play on situation but I am told that the correct answer to the play on the test is the C answer.

So I was wondering if my seeing eye dog is missing something or if something has been left out that I dont know about


Glen,

I dont have the 2002 casebook on play 1-72B that you stated does it say that there is a effect on the play and the coach has the option or not??


Thanks

Don

[Edited by oppool on Feb 17th, 2002 at 10:15 PM]

[kissmyump]

Don, while there are more important things in the world than co-ed softball defensive positioning. When 2 competitive teams compete this could be a major problem and we as umpires need to know what rules to enforce. It amazes me that in the year 2002 ASA with all the brilliant minds available to them choose to be so vague on this issue. It should be cut and dried and written down in black and white. To my knowledge it is not. I probably should get a life and quit worrying about this crap.
;¬)

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by oppool
Hope Mike or one of you who do some slow-pitch can help me out with this.

Question from ASA 2002 test question

39. In a Coed game, R1 on 3B, an outfielder is positioned near 2B and catches a ground ball and retires B2 at 1B and scores R1

A. Legal play, no restriction on defense
B. The umpire should have corrected the positioning prior to
a pitch
C. B and D or correct
D. At the conclusion of the play and upon discovery before a
pitch, allow the offensive coach the option of accepting
the result of the play, or a no pitch that nullifies the
play

Ok I believed the correct answer was B but told by another umpire that has a key to the test that the correct answer is C. I have been through the book many times and dont see anywhere where there is an EFFECT situation on this play so if someone could tell me where I could find it I would fully appreciate it


Thanks

Don

Okay, Don, here we go. The entire interpretation of the play depends on one thing, where were the other outfielders playing?

ASA does not have a restricted distance limited the defensive positioning of the players. Since all three categories of defensive positioning (infield, outfield and battery) must be evenly split between male & female players (unless playing shorthanded), the only call here would be whether one of those categories was overloaded.

Therefore, if the outfielder was the only outfielder that far in, the infield was overloaded and B would apply. However, if all outfielders were playing at a similar depth even though it may have been just behind the infield, there is no violation and all play would be legal.

So, it is possible for B to be the correct answer, but I cannot find anything in the book to substantiate a coach's option. Then again, I haven't had time to go through the new book and they occasionally slip a few things in here or there.

So, depending on the untold circumstances, it could be A or B. Still looking for D to justify C.

[oppool]

Turn in my answer sheet at tonight's meeting and as we were going over the test our UIC from his key read off the right answer being "C" I did question it he looked it up to the reference sheet that come with the key and agreed that it does not state part "D" in the rule book so he said he would accept answer B or C to be correct which I still dont agree with because if it is not stated the I believe we are making up something because it sounds fair but since it only a test and 1 question is not going to make any differnce I will either get a 99 or 100. We will let it pass


Glen or any other that have the new case book if you would please state if the play Glen mention 1-72B is there an EFFECT attached and if so is there a rule# stated


Thanks

Don

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by oppool



Glen or any other that have the new case book if you would please state if the play Glen mention 1-72B is there an EFFECT attached and if so is there a rule# stated


Thanks

Don

I would like to know where you guys got the new case books. I talked to Bob Savoie today and he told me the ASA 2002 Case Book was not yet available. Since Bob, Henry Pollard and Jerry Hanson are the three staff members which meet annually to update the case book, I would think he would know.

So, who is out there selling black market case books? d:-)

[ntxblue]

Don,

Look in the current "Balls & Strikes" magazine. There is a section with "test" questions offered for review. Your question is listed and according to the ASA office, the correct answer is C.

[Elaine "Lady Blue"]

I called Slow Pitch including Co-Ed, and I can't see any answer being true but 'A'. If an outfielder is playing up towards the infield, this is now illegal? Strange----

Hey Mike, have you ever told Savoie that you converse with me on these boards?

[whiskers_ump]

Guys, Gals

The only information I can give about the Case Book
reference is that my UIC said that is what the answer
key sheet used as a reference. As stated, I was only
guessing at answer, since I don't do slow pitch. [My
answer on turned in test was B]

I did call ASA and they said Case Book update would be
ready in about two [2] weeks, and you know how that goes.

glen

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by Elaine "Lady Blue"
I called Slow Pitch including Co-Ed, and I can't see any answer being true but 'A'. If an outfielder is playing up towards the infield, this is now illegal? Strange----

Hey Mike, have you ever told Savoie that you converse with me on these boards?

Elaine,

I've actually walked into a room with your name on my mind, but have never said anything to him.

But, OTOH, he's my boss and I like my job

[oppool]

I have probably beat this subject to death but I thought I would try to clear a few points. With the new rule concerning definition of an Infielder this was explain at the National School that it would clarify that outfielders must be an = distance from home plate basically that if one outfielder would move up and play around a base in the infield this would not be legal because it would defeat the must have 2 female and 2 male ratio in the infield. So if this would happen in game the Umpire should correct it. My problem is with the other part of test question stating the offense has an option if this would occur in the umpires did not catch it before a play occured. No where that I can find in the 2002 rule book does this play have an EFFECT to it. Also in the past if there was not proper ratio in the infield (3 males 1 female) situation my understanding was when the umpire was aware of the situation you would correct it but all previous play stood. There was no EFFECT.


Still my stance tell I can see it in writing


Stubborn

Don

[ntxblue]

Don,

If you like, I can email you a copy of the page from "Balls and Strikes" that outlines this question.


Gary