The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 16, 2010, 01:09am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Glendale, AZ
Posts: 2,672
Need help from CA HS umpires

I worked a multi-state HS tourney this past weekend in Bullhead City, AZ. Several teams from CA were there.

Situation:

Two SoCal area teams playing each other, R1 on first, 2-2 count on the batter. R1 steals on the pitch, pitch called a ball and B1 runs to first base. F2 throws to second, but F6 just cuts off the throw in front of second base and does not attempt to tag R1. My partner (PU) calls B1 back to bat with a 3-2 count and leaves R1 on second. Defensive coach comes out of the dugout wanting B1 called out for interference and R1 returned to first base. We tell him no.

After the inning, DC approaches me and tells me that under CIF rules, the batter should be out for interference and R1 returned to first base. I remind him that this tournament is played under NFHS rules and I have nothing to call on that play. He tells me that the CIF ruling has been in place for a long time.

Is this correct? I can't believe that any rule set would have this ruling. Thanks.
__________________
It's what you learn after you think you know it all that's important!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 16, 2010, 05:20am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 1,640
Could be true. Who knows? Those California folks come up with some weird stuff.

Even if it's an NFHS game, Case Play 3.6.13B suggests that there might be something to call, but that something wouldn't be an out.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 16, 2010, 08:13am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,340
Found this searching for CIF rules set.

1.1 All softball competition in the CIF Central Section shall be conducted in accordance with the National Federation Softball Rules, along with the CIF Central Section Rules and Regulations recommended by the Section's Softball Advisory Committee and approved by the Board of Managers.

There may be some additions under CIF, but by that statement they operate under normal NFHS rules set.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 16, 2010, 11:01am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by BretMan View Post
Could be true. Who knows? Those California folks come up with some weird stuff.

Even if it's an NFHS game, Case Play 3.6.13B suggests that there might be something to call, but that something wouldn't be an out.
Case play has batter and R1 advancing as if it were ball 4. (Potential outcome if deliberate - batter ejected, runner stays at 2B - defensive team has to keep alert)

This situation has the runner stealing to start the play, not waiting to see if the pitch is a ball.

Not the same.
__________________
Rich Ives
Different does not equate to wrong
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 16, 2010, 11:34am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 1,640
No, they're not 100% identically the same. But the point of the case play isn't to address R1's advance. The point is that a batter advancing to first base as if receiving ball four, when it's not ball four, can be ruled as an unsporting act in NFHS softball.

Here the case play in it's entirety:

3.6.13 SITUATION B: With R1 on first, B2 receives ball three and begins advancing to first base as if ball four had been called. R1 advances to second as if B2 has received a walk. F2 quickly asks the umpire if the pitch was ball four, but in the confusion R1 advances to second base safely. RULING: The defensive team should always be alert to the count and attempt plays accordingly. If the umpire believes the team at bat purposely had its batter run to first on ball three, the umpire could eject the batter for exhibiting behavior not in the spirit of fair play. Otherwise, the umpire may warn the coach of the team at bat and eject the next player to exhibit behavior that is not in accordance with the spirit of fair play. R1's advance to second is legal.

I don't see the manner in which R1 happened to advance as being the main point of that ruling.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 16, 2010, 12:24pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Twin Cities MN
Posts: 8,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by BretMan View Post
....the umpire could eject the batter for exhibiting behavior not in the spirit of fair play...
Good ol' NFHS; always looking out for the self-esteem of the little girls. What next? Fake bunts and change-ups?
__________________
Tom
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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Umpires complaining about other umpires tcannizzo Softball 14 Sat Nov 19, 2005 10:00am
For the Umpires Ed Hickland Football 10 Fri Aug 15, 2003 08:13pm
How many would be umpires PeteBooth Baseball 14 Wed Mar 26, 2003 08:51pm
UMPIRES JMN Football 3 Wed Feb 26, 2003 02:59pm
Umpires stripes1977 Football 12 Tue Nov 27, 2001 06:08pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:33am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1