My wife was working a FP game and the following situation ocurred. What's your call?

2 outs, R1 (1st), R2 (2nd). Batter swings and misses 3rd strike, catcher drops the ball in front of her (behind the plate in foul territory). Batter heads for first and drops the bat down near the plate. The bat contacts the ball and knocks it well away toward the dugout. Nothing intentional - the batter was not even aware the ball had been contacted again. What would you do?

Bat hits ball: interference, intentional or not.

Ball hits bat, not interference.

FED ruling:

8-2-6: [The batter-runner shall be called out when] the batter-runner interferes with a fielder attempting to field a batted ball, interferes with fielder attempting to throw the ball, intentionally interferes with a thrown ball while out of the batter's box, makes contact with a fair batted ball before reaching first base, or (F.P.) INTERFERES WITH A DROPPED THIRD STRIKE.

Intent appears to have nothing to do with it. Ring her up.

This was a ball in foul territory. The batter was still in the box. The catcher had already had opportunity to field the ball - it hit her mitt and she then dropped it. It was not a potential foul tip - a swing and a clean miss.

Yes, the bat hit the ball... in foul territory.

Still stand by your answers?

DTTB,

Fair or foul territory, the ball is in play. Catcher having an opportunity to catch it is irrelevent, the ball is in play.

I would stand with Greymule's assessment.

Interesting, I can see several possibilities on this play. If we're under ASA rules, it's very clear - intent is assumed when the bat hits the ball - dead ball, interference, and an out. Fed, however, is different, in Fed, we've got to judge intent when the bat hits the ball on a batted ball, doesn't say anything about a muffed ball - and that's what this is. If we are under Fed rules for this, I believe I've got a live ball. If we're under ASA, I've got interference.

Steve M

Intent is not mentioned in the rule I mentioned earlier. I stand by my judgement.

By the way, in FED baseball, if the described play was unintentional, the ball is live.

I think maybe twobits got this correct. I've had time to do a little research...

Rule 7-3-6 Batting Infractions. ... If a whole bat is thrown and interferes with a defensive player attempting a play, interference shall be called. PENALTY: the batter is out and runners return. If, in the umpire's judgement, interference prevented a possible double play, two may be declared out.

Rule 8-2-6 Batter-Runner is Out. The batter-runner shall be called out when: the batter-runner ...(F.P.) interferes with a dropped third strike. If this interference, in the umpire's judgement, is an obvious (here's the intent) attempt to prevent a double play, the runner closest to home plate shall be called out. PENALTY: ... The ball is dead and runner(s) must return to the last base touched at the time of the interference.

SteveM I'm going to check out the rules fro FED baseball. There might be similar rules. If you have references as to why it would be a live ball, please share them. Thanks everyone.

BTW My wife says she was stumped for a while then decided her best choice was to call it a foul ball... oops. Without this research, I might have done the same thing.

I don't think 7-3-6 applies because a normal drop of the bat by the batter is not "thrown". And as it is not a batted ball, 7-4-1-k does not apply, either. Therefore, the only rule that applies is 8-2-6.

Here's a section of Jon Bennett's softball rules differences book that deals with the bat hitting the ball:

Bat hits ball
Note: if the bat is still moving after being released and it hits the ball, this is considered the bat hitting the ball and is usually interference (see below). If the ball rolls against a bat on the ground which is not moving, it is considered the ball hitting the bat and is not interference unless intentional.
ASA, NCAA — batter interference; the batter is out; the ball is dead (A:7-6J; N:9-9a2)
Fed— not interference unless intentional (7-4-1k) (Referee magazine interpretation)


Like I said in a couple of different posts, if you work ASA, Fed, and/or NCAA, this book is a gold mine.

Steve M

I think "Fed— not interference unless intentional (7-4-1k) (Referee magazine interpretation)" does not apply as it is not a "batted ball". Also, RM is not authoritive.

Where can I get the Jon Bennett's softball rules differences book?

Cecil,
You may be right about the application.

Here's Bennett's email address:

[email protected]

I think I mispelled his name earlier, first name is John - not Jon.

Steve M

Steve,

ASA 7.6.J deals with a batted ball. This scenario does not include any batted balls.

I think too many people are confusing this with contacting a batted ball twice as opposed to interfering with the catcher's ability to make an out.

ASA POE 23.C.3:

IF A BATTER SWINGS AND MISSES THE PITCHED BALL BUT:

3. Hits the ball after it bounces of the catcher or his mitt, the ball is dead, and all runners must return to the base they occupied prior to the pitch. (FP and 16" SP Only) in (2) and (3) if the act is intentional with runner on base, the batter will be called out for interference. If this occurs on strike three in fast pitch, Rule 8.2.F has precedence.

ASA 8.2.F:


BATTER-RUNNER IS OUT:

F. <snip>..discards their bat which prevents the defense from making a play on the ball, or (Fast Pitch Only) interferes with a dropped third strike. <snip>

Either one of the above rules this batter-runner out in the given scenario. No intent is inferred or required.

Does this mean that if you throw only part of the bat, the rule doesn't apply?

http://www.mansun-nl.com/smilies/evillaugh.gif

ditto, there is no batted ball

Mike,

I didn't quote the entire/whole rule (FED 7-3-6)

The ellipsis, "..." means that I left something out. The something in this case was something that I felt was not pertinent but given your concern about the use of the word "whole," I will explain. The first sentence of this rule (following the introduction of Rule 7 Batting, Section 3 Batting Infractions) Article 6 states: "If the bat breaks and is hit by the ball or hits a runner or a fielder, no interference will be called." It continues with the portion I quoted and felt was pertinent, "If a whole bat is thrown and interferes with a defensive player attempting a play, interference shall be called." I was focusing on the interference portion of the rule and somewhat missed the assumption of hitting the ball.

I understand that the ball has not been batted (swing and a miss). However, the infractions listed in Rule 7, Section 3 are not specific to having "hit" the ball. I also recognise that the first part of this rule concerns a broken bat (surprisingly, I have seen a metal bat break) and that generally, the only way to break a bat is to hit a ball.

So the first part of this rule involves hitting a ball, breaking a bat, and the flying portions of the bat. The second part of the rule, one would assume also involves hitting a ball, NOT breaking the bat, and the thrown bat interferes with the defense's efforts. Perhaps it is not applicable, as Cecil says, because the ball has not been batted.

ASA has definite rules addressing this very specific situation. FED is missing those rules but I must assume that the same result as ASA (interference call by the umpire) is likely desired.

In my opinion, the batter has already had her opportunity and was unsuccessful. To call her out at this point is not going to be heatedly discussed and won't be seen as a great injustice by the offensive coach. Obviously this last is my opinion and I don't have the rules to back it up - or to say that such a ruling is wrong. But perhaps I will be prepared when it happens in my game.

DTTB,

Actually, I was just kidding about this as I would think that if the batter THREW anything at the ball, including a whole or partial bat, interference would be the call.

Which will bring be to another play in another thread.