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.

Could be true. Who knows? Those California folks come up with some weird stuff. :rolleyes:

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.

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.

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.

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.

Good ol' NFHS; always looking out for the self-esteem of the little girls. :rolleyes: What next? Fake bunts and change-ups?