ASA Double base play -- I hope I'm not off-base here

[Tap]

I was waiting for our game to start (today I was wearing my player's hat), and the prior game was in the 7th inning, very close game. ASA slow pitch. We were standing along the fence on the OF side of 1B.

Ground ball to F-3, who boots the ball, and it squirts into foul ground, about 6 feet to the foul side of 1B. You know what's coming -- F3 picks the ball up and dives, touch the ball onto the orange safety base and gets the B-R by a step at least (B-R actually only touched white portion I think). The base umpire says "safe" and explains that F-3 touched the wrong base.

I've never seen a play like that, but I was 99.9% certain that the B-R should have been called out, since the play was coming from foul ground (the intent of the rule, as I understand it, is to prevent the F-3 and B-R from crossing paths and colliding, of which this was a textbook example). Tonight I looked at my rule book and my reading confirms that the B-R should have been out, as it was a "force out attempt from the foul side of first base." (Rule 8-2-M-c in 2002 book [get my 2003 book this week]). Thus, either player can touch either base, and that's exactly what happened, and the collision was avoided. If I'm wrong, please let me know.

2. Let's take it one step further. Let's say we have an overthrow from SS that gets away from F-3, and the ball lands six feet to the foul side of 1B. Can F-3 now get the ball and touch the orange base? I think so. It's not necessarily an errant throw as ASA has chosen to define that term at clinics and in the case book, but the play is still a force attempt at 1B from the foul side. What if the ball dropped two feet on the foul side of 1B? One foot?

3. What about a throw that pulls F-3 five steps into foul ground (though F-3 catches it), and F-3 maybe even crashes into the fence but at all times has the ball, and we have a slow runner and a close play. Can F-3 now run back and touch the colored portion? I would think so under the same reasoning as 2. On the other hand, the intent of the rule -- at least as explained by people in the know -- is not to let F-3 get pulled off the bag and just tap the orange base for the out, but at what point does that get converted into a force out attempt from the foul side. I don't believe a throw from one fielder to another covering 1B is required.

Just thinking out loud.

[greymule]

I think "out" is the correct call for all your cases. If the play comes from the foul side of the line, the fielder can use the orange base.

However, the 2001 rule was a bit ambiguous and was clarified for 2002. The 2001 rule said that the fielder can use the orange base "when an errant or missed throw pulls the defensive player into foul ground." It seemed to some people that the rule gave the fielder an extra-long base to use if necessary. However, ASA rewrote the entire section (8-2-M) in 2002 to clarify the point. Apparently, on a throw that pulls the fielder into foul territory, the fielder must catch the ball and then return to the orange base. If he catches it on the orange base, the runner is safe.

It does leave open this possibility: ground ball to F6. Throw is off line. F3 is good enough to know that, though he won't be able to be on the white when he catches the ball, he could catch it and still be on the orange. However, he deliberately pulls his foot off the orange so that he is in foul territory when he catches the throw. Then his stepping on the orange retires the batter. Possible, but somehow I don't think we're going to see it.

[bluefire]

This is one of the rare times that I have to disagree with GreyMule. I believe the intent of 8-2M was to allow for a defensive play on the orange bag for throws coming from home or when an errant throw from the field pulls the defensive player towards foul territory.

If the ball goes into foul territory after a defensive error (such as a bobbled ball like in the 1st situation) and we allow we allow them to use the orange bag, the defense has gained an advantage due to their own error.

The second bag is there for safety, not to provide a second chance for a defensive play.

IMHO

[Edited by bluefire on Mar 3rd, 2003 at 02:58 PM]

[Dakota]

I'm waiting, Mike, for your annual rant on this rule!

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by Dakota
I'm waiting, Mike, for your annual rant on this rule!

I have partially changed my position on this rule since Henry Pollard clarified the term "errant throw" for me.

I still consider it a "lazy coach/player rule" as if those playing first where properly trained, the double base (DB) would not be necessary.

The purpose of the DB is to avoid collisions at 1B and that is the manner in which the rules are written. If the play is coming from the foul side, the runner and/or defender may use either part of the DB.

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Originally posted by bluefire
This is one of the rare times that I have to disagree with GreyMule.

IMHO

Your first post and you choose it to be a disagreement?! Okay.

A disagreement with the Grey Mule.... Whoa! That's pretty bold.

The runner is out in my game. Collision was avoided, and the Mule could be my partner ... if he is willing to have me.

[ronald]

Info:

2003 casebook has play 2.3-6 with a ricochet off F3 into foul territory and F3 touches colored base before B1. Ruling is out and it references 2-3H[1];8-2M[3].

[Tap]

Thanks Ronald! Great to have a CB play on point. I read the dang CB twice while on vacation, a cruise actually (I know I'm sick), and I did not recall that one.

[Elaine "Lady Blue"]

Hey Tap,

Did you ever get a chance to talk to that blue?

[Tap]

Elaine,

I did not speak with him, as I was playing in the next game on his field (he switched to PU for my game) and did not think it was appropriate.

However, I am on a first name basis with his partner (we've attended ASA clinics together), who was PU on the play in question and the BU in my game. At the end of our game, I asked the blue that I knew if he and his partner -- the one who made the call in the prior game -- discussed that play after the game (luckily, the team who benefited from the bad call stranded the tying and winning runs on base in the 7th). The blue I know responded that he thought it was a judgment call and F-3 should not benefit from his own boot. I responded that I thought that was incorrect, and that F-3 could touch the orange base in that circumstance. I'll give my friend the case book cite next time I see him.

Tap