The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 16, 2010, 01:25pm
wife loves the goatee...
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: The Beach
Posts: 242
3 Foot Lane

B1 slaps and ends up two or three steps in front of the plate. She runs directly towsrd 1st base and is outside the 3 foot lane when F2 releases her throw towards 1st base. B1 is not waving or yelling etc. The throw sails into right field. Do you have interference? Please give reference.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 16, 2010, 03:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Twin Cities MN
Posts: 8,154
Depends (on the umpire's judgment). Was this a wild throw, or did the BR interfere with the fielder taking the throw at 1B? Note that the running lane interference is with the fielder at 1B, not with the fielder making the throw. Wild throw is just that - a wild throw, not interference. ASA 8-2-E.
__________________
Tom
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 16, 2010, 04:48pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
Also, which I think is implied in the OP, the runner must have passed the 30 foot mark at the time of the "inteference: if there is any. The time of the release of the throw is not the point, it's where the runner is at the TOI.
__________________
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.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 16, 2010, 04:57pm
wife loves the goatee...
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: The Beach
Posts: 242
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dakota View Post
Depends (on the umpire's judgment). Was this a wild throw, or did the BR interfere with the fielder taking the throw at 1B? Note that the running lane interference is with the fielder at 1B, not with the fielder making the throw. Wild throw is just that - a wild throw, not interference. ASA 8-2-E.

B1 is nowhere near F3 nor is she gesturing, yelling etc.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 16, 2010, 05:04pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRJ1960 View Post
B1 is nowhere near F3 nor is she gesturing, yelling etc.
As Dakota said "Wild throw is just that - a wild throw, not interference. ASA 8-2-E.".
Looks like a no-call to me.
__________________
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.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 16, 2010, 06:32pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 937
Speaking NCAA...Ditto Dakota and CecilOne.
NCAA 12.2.4.2
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 16, 2010, 08:56pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 1,640
Agree with the ASA interpretation. Will take your word for it on the NCAA version.

Didn't NFHS at one time publish an interpretation that if the runner is out of the lane and the umpire judges that is the reason for a bad throw, then it could be ruled as interference?

For example: B/R is out of lane and catcher throws over her head to avoid hitting her, which in turn causes the throw to sail over the head of the fielder receiving the throw. Since the runner's position may have caused the bad throw, you could rule that as interference.

Or am I "misremembering"?
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 16, 2010, 11:01pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by BretMan View Post
Didn't NFHS at one time publish an interpretation that if the runner is out of the lane and the umpire judges that is the reason for a bad throw, then it could be ruled as interference?

Or am I "misremembering"?
Your memory is good, but you have to go back over 30 years when the Fed book said that a "Runner is out . . . when she runs outside the three-foot running lane while the ball is being fielded or thrown to first base."

However, there was a caveat: "This infraction is ignored if the act does not interfere with a fielder or a throw."

That went out in 2002 when Rule 8 was re-written to align with ASA Rule 8.

Speaking ASA, this was a subject of a lot of interest at the last NUS I attended. Kevin discussed it in his presentation, and clinician Steve Rollins held a lengthy drill focusing on this issue.

At that NUS, the ASA position was very clear - IF the runner is outside the 3-foot lane and the fielder could not handle the throw - CALL IT! We ran that drill many times; we never hit the runner, but everytime Steve insisted that we call interference.

Basically the positon is that if the runner is NOT where she belongs so she gets no help; benefit of doubt goes to the fielder.

Of course if umpires will not make this call, catcher's know what they have to do. Rather than risk an error, they will ding the runner and force the umpire to make the call.

WMB
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 17, 2010, 02:00am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1
Wonderful

Share a good website with you,
www.voguesale.com
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 17, 2010, 07:13am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestMichiganBlue View Post
At that NUS, the ASA position was very clear - IF the runner is outside the 3-foot lane and the fielder could not handle the throw - CALL IT! We ran that drill many times; we never hit the runner, but everytime Steve insisted that we call interference.
But did Steve do that because it was a drill or was every instance of the drill decisively INT?

Quote:
Basically the positon is that if the runner is NOT where she belongs so she gets no help; benefit of doubt goes to the fielder.
Absolutely, but there must also BE interference. I believe the point that was attempted is if it is just a bad throw, you don't automatically reward the defense because a runner wasn't between the pipes.

In spite of the many recent changes in some org. that seem, IMO, an attempt to dummy down the rules to reduce the amount of judgment necessary by making certain acts "automatic" calls, I think the umpire needs to use their judgment and make the correct call.

If you stayed for the entire session (NUS), you probably heard common sense referenced a couple of times. This is the type of call where an umpire must see, evaluate and rule on all portions of the event which just occurred without prejudice or predetermination.

Quote:
Of course if umpires will not make this call, catcher's know what they have to do. Rather than risk an error, they will ding the runner and force the umpire to make the call.
Again, another instance why we get the big bucks Most of these players, male, female, adult or youth, couldn't mask an intentional throw at the runner if they wanted to. And making that call if such a play occurs can only add to the integrity of the game, that is, unless they are playing kick ball.

The teams rely upon the umpire to make the correct call, but I can tell you, many scoff at that idea. Those who visit other sites will recognize my reference to many a player/coach/parent who swear the umpires in their area will NOT make the difficult call. Of course, I take this criticism with a grain of salt, but in some instances, it is not a lie. Granted, we must survive, but when it comes down to it, how can an umpire be dinged for making the right call?

How many times to we hear, "you can't call that now" or "you don't make that call in this type of game" or "how can you end a game on a call like that", etc.? Have you even noticed that no one argues that the call is wrong, but just untimely for THEIR team.

Umpires need to do their job. Yes, there needs to be common sense applied to the game, as well, but not to the point that certain violations are completely ignored.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.

Last edited by IRISHMAFIA; Wed Mar 17, 2010 at 04:44pm.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 17, 2010, 11:16am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA View Post
But did Steve do that because it was a drill or was every instance of the drill decisively INT?
Because it was a drill. Like all drills, it didn't perfectly reflect game conditions. What Steve was trying to do was "drill" in to umpire's minds that they could call interference even if the runner wasn't hit by the ball.

Quote:
... if it is just a bat throw, you don't automatically reward the defense because a runner wasn't between the pipes.
Agreed, but - a "bad throw" in this situation is an umpire judgment. IMO, an umpire that does not want to call interference (absent contact) is prejudiced towards a bad throw judgment. So if F2 throws the ball over the runner's head and it sails over the top of F4 at 1B, that's a bad throw! But take the runner out of the way and most of us will agree that any decent catcher can make a glove high throw from 40' or 50'.

Quote:
This is the type of call where an umpire must see, evaluate and rule on all portions of the event which just occurred without prejudice or predetermination.
I agree, and I fully agree with the rest of your philosophical discussion about common sense and making the difficult call, regardless of game circumstances.

But it is my opinion that too many umpires need to see contact (or physical reaction) before they are willing to call obstruction or interference.

I.e., a fielder, runner, and batted ball all moving towards the same spot. The runner doesn't stop; the fielder pulls up and both runner and ball go on through. "She was in my way, Blue!" "Sorry young lady, I can't read your mind; you have to show me that you were attempting to field the ball."

That fielder now knows that next time she will not pull up to avoid contact; instead she will continue into the collision, and force the umpire to make the call.

How many times have we heard coaches telling their players to "run into them and get the call?" "If they are in your way, hit them with the ball and get the call."

Yes, that is why we "get the big bucks," Mike. But how many umpires are willing to risk getting run off the field when they make that controversial "no contact" obstruction or interference call? The fans and coaches are not going to see, or understand the technical nuances of a non-contact call; if you want to survive you probably don't make that call.

WMB

Last edited by WestMichiganBlue; Fri Mar 19, 2010 at 09:40am.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 17, 2010, 05:01pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestMichiganBlue View Post

Agreed, but - a "bad throw" in this situation is an umpire judgment. IMO, an umpire that does not want to call interference (absent contact) is prejudiced towards a bad throw judgment. So if F2 throws the ball over the runner's head and it sails over the top of F4 at 1B, that's a bad throw! But take the runner out of the way and most of us will agree that any decent catcher can make a glove high throw from 40' or 50'.
Easily or they probably shouldn't be a catcher. However, a good catcher will simply slide and take a clean throwing lane instead of forcing a throw around or through a BR.

Quote:
But it is my opinion that too many umpires need to see contact (or physical reaction) before they are willing to call obstruction or interference.
In some cases a physical reaction would be required (OBS), but not always.

Quote:
I.e., a fielder, runner, and batted ball all moving towards the same spot. The runner doesn't stop; the fielder pulls up and both runner and ball go on through. "She was in my way, Blue!" "Sorry young lady, I can't read your mind; you have to show me that you were attempting to field the ball."
Weak argument by the fielder AND umpire since that is not a requirement. BTW, pulling up IS a physical reaction, is it not? Umpire who uses the "cannot read your mind" line as an excuse for ignoring a call isn't a good umpire. Not that those circumstances may not exist as some point (i.e., catcher holding a ball claiming a runner is in her way, instead of actually making some attempt to make a play)

Quote:
That fielder now knows that next time she will not pull up to avoid contact; instead she will continue into the collision, and force the umpire to make the call.
Another reason for the umpire to do their job.

Quote:
How many times have we heard coaches telling their players to "run into them and get the call?" "If they are in your way, hit them with the ball and get the call."
I've heard that the same amount of times I have told the coach/player that if I see that occur and believe it WAS intentional, I will be the first in line to give the policeman, insurance investigator, prosecuting attorney and judge exactly what I heard and saw and my PROFESSIONAL opinion/judgment of what occured on the field. And if you think I haven't done that, you would be mistaken. I do not hesitate to take control of a situation where someone could be injured because of an idiot on the other team who thinks they are Ty ****ing Cobb and this is the world series.

Quote:
Yes, that is why we "get the big bucks," Mike. But how many umpires are willing to risk getting run off the field when they make that controversial "no contact" obstruction or interference call? The fans and coaches are not going to see, or understand the technical nuances of a non-contact call; if you want to survive you probably do make that call.

WMB
Yes, there is a survival factor, but as I stated before, the teams are relying on the umpire to make the correct call and there are two teams on the field.

Not only do I have no problem making that call, but expect it to be made by other umpires. If you do not want to make the tough call, give back the money and take up gardening.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.

Last edited by IRISHMAFIA; Wed Mar 17, 2010 at 05:05pm.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 18, 2010, 06:36am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA View Post
and there are two teams on the field.
3
__________________
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.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 18, 2010, 07:01am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by CecilOne View Post
3
Okay, 3 assuming you have a partner
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Thu Mar 18, 2010, 07:40am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: NC
Posts: 4,361
Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA View Post
Okay, 3 assuming you have a partner
Hey, a single umpire can still be a team.

If we can have an "army of one," we can have an umpiring team of one!
__________________
Dave

I haven't decided if I should call it from the dugout or the outfield. Apparently, both have really great views!

Screw green, it ain't easy being blue!

I won't be coming here that much anymore. I might check in now and again.
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
FED - Three-Foot Running Lane yawetag Baseball 74 Thu Mar 18, 2010 09:45am
Three-foot running lane question. kfo9494 Softball 4 Wed Jan 21, 2009 05:12pm
ASA 3-foot running lane SRW Softball 9 Tue Feb 19, 2008 04:38pm
3 foot lane benbret Softball 17 Thu Apr 06, 2006 01:25pm
Three Foot Running Lane batterup Baseball 5 Wed Jun 06, 2001 10:06am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:00am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1