NSA Rule Interpretation re: Intentionally Dropped Ball

[youngump]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

I personally believe that this should be ruled an intentionally dropped fly ball (IDFB, for short). I think it sets up a cheap double play through unfair deception. Others will disagree with me, and that's fine. Unfortunately, ASA falls into that category, but hey... I call what they want me to call.

If I understand the thinking correctly, There shouldn't be a cheap double play because the runner going to first should have time to get there. On a line drive the play may be different but things are happening fast and the runner is likely to break back towards first.
________
Wong Amat Tower Condominium

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by youngump

If I understand the thinking correctly, There shouldn't be a cheap double play because the runner going to first should have time to get there. On a line drive the play may be different but things are happening fast and the runner is likely to break back towards first.

In the two instances where I've invoked this rule, both infielders had an easy shot at making the double play. And I mean easy.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

In the two instances where I've invoked this rule, both infielders had an easy shot at making the double play. And I mean easy.

In either play, was one of your outs the BR?

[greymule]

I know of no code, baseball or softball, that prohibits a fielder from letting a ball drop untouched to the ground.

There are two protections against "deception": (1) the infield fly rule, and (2) the fact that the BR should run on a batted ball.

Codes do differ, however, in whether a fielder is allowed to "guide the ball" to the ground. For example, in ASA, this is legal. In OBR, it is not.

[BretMan]

Every baseball and softball rule set I've been able to reseach has the requirement of actual contact between the ball and the fielder before an intentional drop can be ruled. That is, allowing the ball to drop untouched is perfectly legal.

Except, it appears, for NSA- if you read how their rule is worded. If that is the case, then they are the "odd man out" of the baseball and softball world. It wouldn't be the first time that one organization or the other went against the grain with one of their interpretations.

What I was trying to get is some "official" confirmation of that. I have sent an email to the NSA Umpire-in-Chief to see if he can confirm this.

[greymule]

I just looked at NSA's 7-11-e. The wording is horrendous—ambiguous in several different ways, with unclear references and a couple of gaps in logic. And all those listings of people on base are unnecessary; all that was needed was "with 1B occupied and less than 2 out."

Including "lets drop" with "drops" could reasonably indicate that letting the ball drop without touching it is illegal. But couldn't a "trapped ball," which is apparently not covered under this rule, first be intentionally allowed to drop?

With rules written this badly, no wonder there is confusion.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

In either play, was one of your outs the BR?

In both cases, yep. Dead ball, BR's out.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

In both cases, yep. Dead ball, BR's out.

I meant if you didn't make the ID call

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I meant if you didn't make the ID call

Ummm... Am I missing something here? In ASA, the ball is either caught or not caught. If it's caught (meeting the necessary definitions of a catch), then intentionally dropped to the ground, I've got a dead ball with the BR out. If it's in the glove, but dropped before control was ever gained (ie., it squirts out of the glove), then I've got nothing.

What part of the question am I missing?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

Ummm... Am I missing something here? In ASA, the ball is either caught or not caught. If it's caught (meeting the necessary definitions of a catch), then intentionally dropped to the ground, I've got a dead ball with the BR out. If it's in the glove, but dropped before control was ever gained (ie., it squirts out of the glove), then I've got nothing.

What part of the question am I missing?

Yes, you are. Instead of answering the question, you are thinking

I wanted to know if one of the outs you would believe is undeserved due to the deception is the BR.

The reason I wanted to know has already been noted in another post. A BR who runs when they hit the ball will never be doubled up due to an intentionally dropped ball. If the BR doesn't run? Shame on them, no protection is deserved.