The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sun Mar 03, 2002, 10:35pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 549
Must of you are aware by now of the new ASA rules and the one that covers interference on a fly ball(fair or foul)that we now have the runner and the batter out. BUT some key words here on this play that most of you vets probably already got but this umpire didnt relize until I was rereading again tonight since it is too cold to do anything else is this EFFECT only takes place if the catch is so deemed ROUTINE and with ORDINARY EFFORT if not we use the old ruling which is Runner ruled out and strike on the batter covered in POE#31d. I will bet that this will cause some problems for awhile till everybody gets on the same page

Hopefully by typing this out I will remember it when it happens in one of my games

Don
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 04, 2002, 09:52am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Twin Cities MN
Posts: 8,154
What I find annoying is the inventing of new words to describe similar plays without explaning why there are new words. In this new 8-8-J-L EXCEPTION, we have,

...routine fly ball ... with ordinary effort...

while in the old 1-INFIELD FLY, we have,

... fly ball ... with ordinary effort ....

What does ROUTINE mean?

What is the difference between a ROUTINE fly ball that can be caught with ordinary effort and a just plain fly ball that can be caught with ordinary effort? Did the rule writers intend to communicate some difference here, or were they just being sloppy wrt how prior rules have been worded?

Does a ROUTINE fly ball include a bunt and line drive?

Of course, there are other differences between an infield fly and the new exception (runners, reference to infielders, etc.), but I am wondering about the word ROUTINE.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 04, 2002, 12:12pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 549
Cool OH YEAH

I should note on the above play when a runner interfers with a fielder on a FOUL fly ball that is not ruled ordinary the strike on the batter + the out ruled on the runner that interfers. I am assuming on a FAIR fly ball that a fielder is interfered with and is not ruled a ordinary play than we would award BR 1st and call the runner out. It may just be me but I can see this getting confusing to some when this will occur


JMT

Don
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 04, 2002, 12:47pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Twin Cities MN
Posts: 8,154
Try this...

Top of inning: R1 on 1B. B2 hits a "routine" fly ball that can be caught with "ordinary effort" by F4. R1 runs into F4; ball falls to the ground. I rule R1 out on interference; BR out on "routine - ordinary effort" rule.

Bottom of inning: R1 on 1B. B2 hits a fly ball with a low arch toward F3. R1 runs into F3 who is making a valiant effort to field the ball. I rule the fly ball was not "routine", so I call R1 out in interference and award BR 1B.

Explanation to coach follows.

I'm looking forward to it.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 04, 2002, 01:06pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
I think you guys/gals are making a bit too much of this change. You'll know what to call when you see it and you will tell the coaches the same thing you tell them when they question you on not calling a IF the landed near an infielder.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 04, 2002, 01:59pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Twin Cities MN
Posts: 8,154
Talking

Quote:
Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
I think you guys/gals are making a bit too much of this change.
Aww, don't spoil our fun!

I still wonder why they added "routine." Why not use the same wording as the IFR?
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 04, 2002, 02:02pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally posted by Dakota
Quote:
Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
I think you guys/gals are making a bit too much of this change.
Aww, don't spoil our fun!

I still wonder why they added "routine." Why not use the same wording as the IFR?
It may be nothing more than who wrote the rule and how it was presented for adoption.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 04, 2002, 03:04pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 549
Cool

Quote:
Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
I think you guys/gals are making a bit too much of this change.





There is always one in the crowd! Always trying to make things simple and take all the fun out!!


Don
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 04, 2002, 03:13pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Plano, TX
Posts: 229
I think Mike has pointed out the real reason for the verbage issues. Listening to the ASA gurus at National School and at local ASA clinics, everyone who had submitted a rule change wanted to talk about it - one guy from Texas, one from Georgia, and one from West Virginia.

Great people, but as Henry Pollard says, "I talk funny." Same as the tomato issue, Elaine.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:22am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1