|
Thu Apr 18, 2002, 11:23pm
|
|||
|
|||
Here is a play that came up tonight for discussion and to tell you the truth my 1st thoughts on this play I would of blown it. Probably too easy though for you vets
Drop 3rd strike hits catcher shin guard and the ball rolls out in front of home. The BR leaving the box unintentionally kicks away the ball from F2 on her way to 1st Whats the call?? Don 
|
|
Thu Apr 18, 2002, 11:41pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Don........
In my mind.........the defense had the opportunity for the out........ It was NOT a batted ball.........so we have to judge intent.... Unless the BR intentionally kicked the ball........I have a live ball...........PLAY ON...... Joel
|
|
Fri Apr 19, 2002, 11:07am
|
|||
|
|||
|
In FED rules, she's out. Don't know which set of rules you are playing with.
8-2-6: Batter-runner is out when...the batter runner interferes with a dropped third strike. Interesting enough, in FED baseball, the word "intentionally" is added, making intent a factor on calling the B-R out. In OBR, the rule book makes no such mention of this occurring. This happened to me once in a OBR baseball game, and we ruled the B-R safe because the catcher had a chance to catch the pitch, and there was no intent involved.
__________________
"Not all heroes have time to pose for sculptors...some still have papers to grade."
|
|
Fri Apr 19, 2002, 11:14pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Actually I dont do FED but we were at the time talking about this happening in a high-school game. My 1st thought were runner out due to interference BUT the other blues convinced me it was a no-call it would be the same as a BR making contact with a thrown ball unintentionally
Is this rule covered in ASA? Thanks Don
|
|
Sat Apr 20, 2002, 12:58am
|
|||
|
|||
|
TwoBits has an interesting point, re the Fed rule.
However if F2 deflected the ball into the path of the B-R... It just doesn't seem logical to penalize the B-R. (The wording is identical to inteference with a batted ball and if a defensive player deflects the batted ball into the B-R that wouldn't be inteference.) No case plays in the 2002 casebook on this point. I'll have to check the old rule & case books when I get home to see if I can find anything. Roger Greene
|
|
Sat Apr 20, 2002, 08:31am
|
|||
|
|||
|
I believe NFHS completely rewrote rule 8 for 2002 to make it more ASA-like.
Anyhow, ASA has the same wording as TwoBits quoted. (ASA 8-2-F). THE BATTER-RUNNER IS OUT when the batter-runner ... interferes with a dropped third strike... This case is not covered in either the ASA POEs or the ASA Case Book. As unfortunate as this is for the batter-runner, the rule says she is out. Intent is not required.
|
|
Sat Apr 20, 2002, 08:32am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Speaking ASA
I believe this is a no-call. The BR has the right to advance to 1B. Any unintentional contact with that ball does not meet the requirements set forth in 8.2 to rule the BR out. I don't believe you can expect the BR to locate a loose ball while trying to advance to 1B.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
|
|
Sat Apr 20, 2002, 08:33am
|
|||
|
|||
|
BTW, the 2001 NFHS rule says the BR is out if she interferes with the catcher's attempt to field the dropped third strike. A fine point, but one that in this case would probably result in a no-call, whereas the revised rule results in an out.
|
|
Sat Apr 20, 2002, 08:35am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
 But, I'm willing to be convinced, since your ruling seems only fair. How do you get that out of the rule, though?
|
|
Sat Apr 20, 2002, 10:32am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dakota,
Cannot prove a negative. I do not believe 8.2.F applies in this case, not even the "(Fast Pitch Only) interferes with a dropped third strike" clause. Granted, the play is a dropped third strike, but the catcher allowed the ball to enter an area routinely used by BRs advancing to 1B to which, in this case, s/he is entitled to do. However, I too am open to any other rule which you may think applies.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
|
|
Sat Apr 20, 2002, 08:32pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bob,
We are talking ASA here and 8.2 is Batter-Runner is Out. There is no 8.2.6 in the ASA rules book.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
|
|
Sun Apr 21, 2002, 12:52am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I don't have a NFHS 2002 book, but I understand NFHS completely rewrote Rule 8 so perhaps for 2002 8-2 is the right reference. Some of you guys must have the NFHS 2002 book handy, right?
|
|
Sun Apr 21, 2002, 09:57am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
However, regardless of the book, I do not believe you can hold the BR liable for the catcher's inability to control the ball. Should we require the BR to locate the ball prior to attempting to advance to 1B on a DTS? Other than one being a batted ball and the other a muffed catch, what is the difference between this scenario and a runner making unintentional contact with deflected batted ball?
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
|
|
Sun Apr 21, 2002, 01:18pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
