Offense opens the gate

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

I'm a little surprised by some of these responses.

First, the recent and repetitive rule changes to eliminate intent as a factor, and to rule on the action itself; yet several here are basing their response on a perceived lack of intent.

Second, the most comparable rule relating to an inappropriate action by an offensive player would certainly be a blocked ball by offensive equipment; again, intent is disregarded, has no bearing on the outcome, the only decision is interference (runner closest to home is out, all other runners return to last base touched), or simply a blocked ball/dead ball, and all runners return to last base touched.

^^^^^^
This is my thought as well, but I'm hard-pressed to define the gate as "offensive equipment." The gate, in my opinion, belongs to the field, even though the particular is under the control of the offense.

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

You simply cannot allow the offense to benefit from an illegal and/or inappropriate act that denies the defense a fair opportunity to make a play. Any other consideration is missing the boat.

I wholeheartedly agree that the offense should not be allowed to benefit from unfairly and illegally creating a dead ball situation. The reason I mentioned it deflecting off the gate first is because I view this to be a thrown ball that is "touched, stopped or handled by a person not engaged in the game," which is the crux of the definition of a blocked ball.

Where it starts to become grey is when the correct on-deck batter (in this sitch, B4) commits such an act, since they are allowed to be out on the field. However, I think the above definition of a blocked ball still applies, as they are not officially engaged in the game, and their actions, indirect as they may be, still exert influence upon the ball's path.

Where it becomes even more grey is if it doesn't touch the gate at all. There's no real "handling," but I still think the blocked ball rules apply.

Thoughts?