My First Ever Official Protest

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by BretMan

Sorry to drag up an old thread, but I do have something to add that might be worthy of comment.

I've already posted my understanding of how "an errant throw pulling the fielder off the base into foul ground" is to be interpreted. Now, maybe I am going to have to revise my understanding.

The protest from my game, and another discussion of this same rule on another forum, got me digging for "official" interpretations. No luck there at all.

One little quirk in the actual rule I did come across: The NFHS rule refers to an errant throw pulling a fielder "off the base". The ASA rule says the fielder must be pulled "off the white base". Interestingly, prior to 2008 the ASA rule said only "off the base". In 2008, somebody slipped that "white" in there. I don't know if there is any significance to that- but random words don't usually appear in the middle of a rule by chance. This was not highlighted as a rule change or an editorial change.

Anyhow, just to "cover all the bases", I sent an email to the ASA National Supervisor of Umpires for clarification.

In an email received today, according to what I would consider "an authorative source"...apparently I have had it all wrong. His email stated that the errant throw does NOT need to pull the fielder completely off the base, past the colored base, and completely into foul ground for rule 8-2-M(5) to apply.

I was told that simply being pulled directly from the white to the colored portion satisfies the requirement of the rule. I was even given an example of a fielder setting up on the white base, jumping in the air to receive an errant throw, then landing on the colored base. This was presented as an example of the fielder legally using the colored base due to an errant throw.

Just when you think you know it all...

Previous Case Book Play (2005-2006)

Play 8.2-40

B1 hits a ground ball to F6. While B1 advances to 1B a double base, F3 is pulled to the colored portion of 1B by F6's throw which arrives prior to B1 touching the colored portion.

Ruling: B1 is safe. Since this is a force out attempt from fair territory, the defense must use the white portion.


And someone may correct me, but I was pretty sure this was discussed a few years back when someone proposed a definition of "errant throw" be added to the book so everyone applied the rule the same. A prominent silver-haired gentleman with an distinguished career of umpiring and rules interpretation stood and specifically noted that the exception was supposed to apply when the defender was returning "from" foul territory, not from fair landing in foul ground.

I don't care for the interpretation BretMan is relaying as it defeats the purpose of rule and awards the defense for poor play. But it that is the way ASA wants it called, that is what I will teach.

Personally, I feel they should either eliminate any possibility of players crossing paths at 1B or do away with the safety base as there is nothing safe about it.