Award after obstruction on another runner

[Dakota]

You didn't answer my question. Where does the rule book use the term "dead ball" when it means "delayed dead ball"? You want to interpret the use of the term "dead ball" in 8-4-3b PENALTY-a as meaning "delayed dead ball". Prove it.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by Dakota

You didn't answer my question. Where does the rule book use the term "dead ball" when it means "delayed dead ball"? You want to interpret the use of the term "dead ball" in 8-4-3b PENALTY-a as meaning "delayed dead ball". Prove it.

To add to this, in what situation is 8-4-3b being a delayed dead ball anything but surplusage. We already had a DDB before the put out so what exactly does that rule mean?
________
Pattaya condominiums

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by blueit

I understand what you're all saying & I really don't want to argue

Thank God. Could you imagine how long the posts would be if he DID want to argue?

[ronald]

there is no need to be captious.

by now it should follow that the dead ball call is 'immediate' given that all playing action needs to cease. when? right now which means immediate. wanting too much from the rule book.

gotta go library is closing

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by ronald

there is no need to be captious. ...

Are you trying to spoil our fun?

[argodad]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Thank God. Could you imagine how long the posts would be if he DID want to argue?

Well, y'all did compliment him on his well-written, complete, and clear first post!

[blueit]

It may well be my last post. This will be my last on this topic.

We've got a rule that doesn't say immediate or delayed dead ball (for the tag that makes no safe-out difference). We've got a comment that specifically says call dead ball at the end of the play, not upon the non-event tag. And we end up awarding bases or protection to runners not affected by the obstruction. None of those things seem to bother anyone here.

Evidently it's too much of a threat to the "this is how we call it" mindset
to even acknowledge that the rule is incomplete or the comment is wrong,
not to mention explore the WHY of whether a meaningless tag should kill further action. I was hoping for some real objective, 'big picture' discussion of why this SHOULD be called as it apparently is, and at least an acknowledgment that both the rule and comment need some improvement or (as to the comment) deletion.

Instead, it's just, over and over, "of course it's an immediate dead ball ... because that's how we call it."

I've taken an informal poll among 3-4 of the younger umps in our group & several of the old timers. The former group, after I've explained "how it's called", despite the casebook comment, was unanimous that "That doesn't make much sense." The latter group's reaction was, "That's how it's always been called," and they don't really want to think about whether it really makes sense or not -- that's just the way it is. It's apparent which group predominates here.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by blueit

It may well be my last post. This will be my last on this topic.

We've got a rule that doesn't say immediate or delayed dead ball (for the tag that makes no safe-out difference). We've got a comment that specifically says call dead ball at the end of the play, not upon the non-event tag. And we end up awarding bases or protection to runners not affected by the obstruction. None of those things seem to bother anyone here.

Evidently it's too much of a threat to the "this is how we call it" mindset
to even acknowledge that the rule is incomplete or the comment is wrong,
not to mention explore the WHY of whether a meaningless tag should kill further action. I was hoping for some real objective, 'big picture' discussion of why this SHOULD be called as it apparently is, and at least an acknowledgment that both the rule and comment need some improvement or (as to the comment) deletion.

Instead, it's just, over and over, "of course it's an immediate dead ball ... because that's how we call it."

I've taken an informal poll among 3-4 of the younger umps in our group & several of the old timers. The former group, after I've explained "how it's called", despite the casebook comment, was unanimous that "That doesn't make much sense." The latter group's reaction was, "That's how it's always been called," and they don't really want to think about whether it really makes sense or not -- that's just the way it is. It's apparent which group predominates here.

Let me repeat... You didn't answer my question. Where does the rule book use the term "dead ball" when it means "delayed dead ball"? You want to interpret the use of the term "dead ball" in 8-4-3b PENALTY-a as meaning "delayed dead ball". Prove it.

A couple of things you need to learn about the NFHS (or ASA or nearly any other) rule book. First, it is not a fine piece of writing. Second, it assumes the reader has familiarity with the game. Third, it uses defined terms as defined.

On point one, the so-called ambiguity you cite is not a big deal in light of points 2 and 3.

On point two, if you are unfamiliar with how the game is called, that is what clinics and training are for. Parsing the syntax of the rule book will only get you so far... see point number 1.

On point three, when the book says the ball is dead, it means it. Dead. Kaput. Playing action stops. Right then. That is the meaning of the word in the rules. It really doesn't matter what Webster might say, or whether a case play doesn't cover all possible variations or answer all possible questions. A dead ball is dead.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by blueit

It may well be my last post. This will be my last on this topic.

We've got a rule that doesn't say immediate or delayed dead ball (for the tag that makes no safe-out difference). We've got a comment that specifically says call dead ball at the end of the play, not upon the non-event tag. And we end up awarding bases or protection to runners not affected by the obstruction. None of those things seem to bother anyone here.

Evidently it's too much of a threat to the "this is how we call it" mindset
to even acknowledge that the rule is incomplete or the comment is wrong,
not to mention explore the WHY of whether a meaningless tag should kill further action. I was hoping for some real objective, 'big picture' discussion of why this SHOULD be called as it apparently is, and at least an acknowledgment that both the rule and comment need some improvement or (as to the comment) deletion.

Instead, it's just, over and over, "of course it's an immediate dead ball ... because that's how we call it."

I've taken an informal poll among 3-4 of the younger umps in our group & several of the old timers. The former group, after I've explained "how it's called", despite the casebook comment, was unanimous that "That doesn't make much sense." The latter group's reaction was, "That's how it's always been called," and they don't really want to think about whether it really makes sense or not -- that's just the way it is. It's apparent which group predominates here.

Besides Tom's excellent points, I'd just add one thing. You haven't been carefully reading the responses you are getting because this has been dealt with. For example, I provided you a case where your proposed alternative language wouldn't work and a case where your rule would just create a mess and you dropped those threads. Tom has very clearly pointed out that dead ball means dead ball and challenged you to provide a single rule book rule where that wasn't the case multiple times.
You assert that there is a case play with comment that is incorrect, but you haven't posted the whole text of it so what you see as a contradiction might well just be a case where you're missing a distinguishing factor of the play. The folks here will be happy to teach you as noted by the fact that they put up with me. They are veterans who like helping people and discussing interesting softball situations. But you have to put in a fair effort on your side and realize that you're not offering anything to them. They know how to call this and they know how to read the rule.
________
Volcano Review

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by blueit

It may well be my last post. This will be my last on this topic.

We've got a rule that doesn't say immediate or delayed dead ball (for the tag that makes no safe-out difference).

Yes, it does. I challenge you to cite the rule that even brings it into question. I reiterate, "a rule", not a TWP scenario.

We've got a comment that specifically says call dead ball at the end of the play, not upon the non-event tag. And we end up awarding bases or protection to runners not affected by the obstruction. None of those things seem to bother anyone here.

That is because we read the rules, attend/conduct clinics and schools and study interpretations provided by the powers that be. You are debating a rule that is explicitly clear as to the status of the ball.

The ONLY question is that which started this thread of where to place runners between bases when the ball, BY RULE, is declared dead. You have been given opinion, interpretation and rule applications as to how this situation can be handled.

Evidently it's too much of a threat to the "this is how we call it" mindset
to even acknowledge that the rule is incomplete or the comment is wrong,
not to mention explore the WHY of whether a meaningless tag should kill further action. I was hoping for some real objective, 'big picture' discussion of why this SHOULD be called as it apparently is, and at least an acknowledgment that both the rule and comment need some improvement or (as to the comment) deletion.

Instead, it's just, over and over, "of course it's an immediate dead ball ... because that's how we call it."

NO, IT IS AN IMMEDIATE DEAD BALL BECAUSE THE RULE SAYS SO!!!

I've taken an informal poll among 3-4 of the younger umps in our group & several of the old timers. The former group, after I've explained "how it's called", despite the casebook comment, was unanimous that "That doesn't make much sense." The latter group's reaction was, "That's how it's always been called," and they don't really want to think about whether it really makes sense or not -- that's just the way it is. It's apparent which group predominates here.

Then your group has either received some pretty poor training or you haven't been paying attention.....sorta like in this thread.

[ronald]

Ok. Did not know you guys were having fun. I saw something different from the other side.

[Skahtboi]

Wow! I miss a week of OF and of course, an argument ensues.

[argodad]

Originally Posted by Skahtboi

Wow! I miss a week of OF and of course, an argument ensues.

Heck, it's usually only 24 hours! A week makes it guaranteed.

[charliej47]

Originally Posted by blueit

I appreciate the advice from the experienced pros, but what you're saying to do doesn't square with the NFHS casebook. Maybe ASA or NCAA is different, but I'm reading the Fed books. There could be something else in the rulebook or casebook I missed that contradicts what I'm reading, but the case book (2009 version) says twice -- under "Delayed Dead Ball" comment 5.1.2 and again under 8.4.3 Situation C that the umpire declares the ball dead "at the end of playing action."

If a runner is going from 2B to 3B as an obstructred runner is being tagged "out" (she's not out, she's safe due to the obs., so the tag means nothing & is just wasted effort by the defense) at the plate, I've got to say "'playing action" has not ended. F2 could still throw to 3B & try to get an out there on an advancing runner.

And the reality is that the runner at 2B is not affected at all by the obstruction at the plate, other than in a positive way (gaining some time while F2 obstructs & then tries to tag the obstructed runner). I really don't think that's what the rule means by "affected." Again, NFHS casebook comment 8.4.3, Sit C (2009 ed.) says very specifially that an award would be made to "all runners effected by the obstruction ..." (It means "affected".) I don't think that means a runner at 2B when the obs. play is at home, 84 feet away.

So, begging to differ (and with some trepidation), I don't think there should be an award to the runner between 2B & 3B at all, so long as "playing action" continues.

If I'm wrong, I'd sure like a rulebook or casebook reference that I could use to back me up if I kill a play after a non-out tag is made on an obstructed runner & other action continues on the play.

The real interesting question: if F2 comes up from the non-out tag & throws the runner out at 3B, is it an out? The way the NFHS casebook reads, I think it is. The unaffected runner should get no protection.

I think Rule 8-4, Art. 3c leads to the same result. 8-4-3c uses the same wording "each other runner affected by the obstruction" will be awarded bases. I don't think a runner at 2B is affected by obs. at the plate, at least not in the way the rule means.

Rule 8-4, Art. 3a could be read differently, but I think something has to be implied that's not specifically stated there. Art. 3a does say that if "the obstructed runner is put out prior to reaching the base that would have been reached had there not been obstruction, a dead ball is called and the obstructed runner and each other runner affected by the obstruction" are awarded basis.

I've got 2 problems with the wording of Art. 3a, though. One, using the term "put out" doesn't make much sense, because the runner isn't out at all. She's safe. If the intent is to say "tagged," then the Rule should say tagged.
Two, although Art. 3a says "a dead ball is called," it does not say WHEN the dead ball is called -- whether immediately or after other playing action ends. The casebook comments DO say when, twice: "at the end of playing action."

I can't see killing the play, with "playing action" continuing, immediately when a useless tag is made on a safe, obstructed runner. Doing that gives the defense (which has just committed an infraction) an advantage: they can possibly "freeze" runners by making a pointless tag.

And what happens if F2, hearing an "Obstruction ... Safe!" call, realizes that a tag on the safe runner is a waste of time & effort, so she makes a throw
to try to get a runner heading to another base? If "dead ball" isn't called without a tag & play continues, why should it be called with a tag? The F2 who's just obstructed a runner should have the ability to stop further play by making a meaningless tag on the obstructed runner? That doesn't make sense to me.

Maybe 8-4 Art. 3a has been applied as you say and that's just "how it's done." But if so, it's not done the way the comments to the casebook say it should be done.

I'm getting conflicting advise from experienced umpires and the casebook comments. Oh boy.

The "playing action" it the play being made on the runner by F2.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by charliej47

The "playing action" it the play being made on the runner by F2.

I'm not sure how seriously to take that with the smiley and all. But that's definitely not helping.
________
Medical marijuana dispesary