![]() |
|
|
|||
Hypothetical
Watching a game yesterday and saw the following situation...
R1 on 2nd. 0 or 1 out Left handed batter Batter strikes out. R1 steals third. Batter walks toward dugout (3B side) crossing between catcher and 3rd. Catcher holds the ball (doesn't make attempt to get R1). A) Could interference have been called on batter (already out)? B) Would C needed to have made a throw for interference to have been called? C) What is the result if this is interference? R1 out? R1 back on 2nd? What if R1 started on third and had a lead? C still held the throw b/c of the batter. I had no dog in this fight, just thought it was an interesting scenario. BTW, I'm not a blue, just a parent who likes to know the rules (although I'm not always successful ![]() |
|
|||
NCAA rules:
A) Yes B) No. If batter movement is judged to be intentional to protect runner, you have a double play. C) See B. Expect a conversation from the OC. Runner at third would be more difficult to sell especially without a throw and double especially if she didn't attempt to go home. |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
For what it's worth, DC asked C why she didn't throw and C answered "she was in my way". Now, granted this was 10U, and probably one of those things that you'll only rarely see, so I understood why C didn't attempt the play, and why PU didn't call anything. I was just curious what would have happened if...
Thanks |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Steve ASA/ISF/NCAA/NFHS/PGF |
|
|||
In 6.12 of the CCA manual, pg 100 (I only have 2009 on me right now), it states that "if a runner is coming toward a defensive player, a throw is not required to have an interference call". Upon re-reading the OP I agree that there shouldn't be a DP because it states that no play was being made. If a play was being made (catcher rises and initiates a throwing motion) and a throw was not attempted because of the retired batter is in the way, I'm probably going to ring her up.
|
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'” West Houston Mike |
|
|||
Quote:
A & B) If the umpire believed the retired player interfered with the catcher's opportunity to get an out, yes. HOWEVER, the umpire shouldn't be expected to be a mind reader. I'm going to use a term I don't like to use often, but I think it works here. The catcher doesn't have to make a throw, but at least come up with a softball move to show the umpire she was not just sitting on the ball. C) Runner closest to home is declared out.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball. |
|
|||
(This is in response to a post I made titled: Wondering" - I mistakenly posted the a question here and deleted it, then noticed that there were two responses... sorry for any confusion)
|
|
|||
(This is in response to a post I made titled: Wondering" - I mistakenly posted the a question here and deleted it, then noticed that there were two responses... sorry for any confusion)
|
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Another hypothetical | Larry1953 | Baseball | 4 | Sat Jun 18, 2011 09:37pm |
backcourt hypothetical | rsl | Basketball | 15 | Thu Feb 10, 2011 04:50pm |
Hypothetical + Foul | shutupneff | Basketball | 2 | Mon Feb 01, 2010 06:35am |
Hypothetical Becomes Reality | 26 Year Gap | Basketball | 1 | Thu Jan 28, 2010 06:48pm |
How would this hypothetical be sorted out? | bas2456 | Basketball | 26 | Wed Mar 04, 2009 04:06pm |