![]() |
|
|
|||
Quote:
Please let me know if I'm wrong, but if by "the rest of her body was outside the box" you're talking about a foot on the ground completely outside the box, I've got an interference. |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Dan |
|
|||
Quote:
The ball in or out is not the criteria.
__________________
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. |
|
|||
Quote:
But for running, one foot on the ground and completely out of the box = not out of the box. That doesn't seem right. Anyone have a specific rule for me? Last edited by Jaycec; Fri May 16, 2008 at 09:23am. |
|
|||
Quote:
You can view his answer here This seems to make sense given the rules of when a batter is considered in the box and when she isn't. ASA tends to be very consistent. I believe the OP should have called the batter out when she touched the ball given she was out of the box. Edited to add: Again, assuming "most of her body" includes a foot touching the ground outside the lines. |
|
|||
I believe we are over-thinking this one. There's some point in time in each of these situations where the batter goes from "in the box" to "out of the box." It is a judgment call. Make your judgment based on the information you have, then sell your call. Personally, I give the batter the benefit of the doubt. If in doubt, "Dead Ball! Foul!"
__________________
Larry |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
"hitting, one foot on the ground and completely out of the box = out of the box" - discrete boundary, observable object, the batter's foot is either there or not "running, one foot on the ground and completely out of the box = not out of the box" - the entire box is treated as foul territory for batter position only, because the mass of the batter's body being over the foul line or not is nearly impossible to judge when in motion. Yes, the accepted view is if the batter has either foot or other body part touching the box, the batter is in the box.
__________________
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. |
|
|||
Quote:
Last edited by Jaycec; Mon May 19, 2008 at 10:39am. |
|
|||
Quote:
2-25-f 7-4-8 7-4-13 exc and case How is "one foot out = out of box" more logical than "one foot in = in box"? It's the other way around, and we have discussed this more than once in the forum and agreed that is the case.
__________________
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. |
|
|||
Quote:
Sorry I've missed your discussions; I'm new here. Can you give me a link? From what I'm seeing right now, the ASA rule book has one rule about when a player is in/out of the box. You're claiming it changes based on batter/batter-runner. I don't see any reason for thinking this. Again, a link would be helpful I suppose. The only link I found confirmed my belief. |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
The "for batter position only" meant that a batter still in the box is treated as if in foul ground, so a batter struck by a batted ball while in any part of the batters box results in a foul ball.
__________________
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. |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Ball hits plate, then batter | njdevs00cup | Baseball | 4 | Sat May 12, 2007 08:16pm |
ball hits batter | cards2323 | Baseball | 2 | Tue May 10, 2005 10:48am |
Batter hits ball twice while in box | chuck chopper | Softball | 2 | Thu Apr 29, 2004 09:40pm |
batter hits ball after hits ground | kfinucan | Softball | 13 | Sun Jun 29, 2003 09:29pm |
ball hits ground then batter | amc1 | Softball | 2 | Wed May 29, 2002 07:50am |