ASA or NFHS FP. Bases loaded, 0 outs or 1 out.

Ball hit back to pitcher, throws to home for the force on R1. F2 throws to first but hits BR with the ball. BR is out of the running lane. Interference is called.

How many outs do you have on this play and where do you place the remaining runners?

(This actually happened this weekend in a 12u ASA national qualifier tournament)

Speaking ASA and assuming the call on the BR was legitimate, you just rang up two outs. Unless the inning was over, R2 & R3 are placed on the base last touched at the time of the interference.

ASA Rule 1 Force out
Rule 8.7.C
Rule 8.2.E & Effect

That was easy, but please don't tell me that when the umpire ruled on the 3' lane violation, they also ruled it alleviated the force and did not rule R1 out at the plate.

I thought maybe this was a trick question of some kind, but I can't think of any way the ruling could be anything other than what Mike stated.

Right and ditto for NFHS, probably the others. Maybe Andy needs to explain more. But as someone said the other day, you never know what the coaches will claim.

:D :D The offense coach will claim you can't call the interference because it wasn't the first play or because the ball wasn't batted to F2. The defense coach will say it prevented F3 from throwing to 2nd and want a triple play. :D :D :rolleyes:

Two outs. Again, there are rules in ASA, USSSA, NFHS and Dixie that cover this.

Scott

I had this very thing happen last week in a High School Varsity game(NFHS).
Bottom of the 7th, bases loaded, one out, score tied 2 - 2.
I'm PU, Batter hits two hopper to the pitcher, throw goes home to F2 for force out, Catcher steps up and throws to first. BR comes out of the running lane about two steps before the bag. Just as BR's lead leg is in the air to touch 1B, throw hits her in the top of the helmet and caroms into RF.
1b was reaching for the ball and appeared she may have contacted it too. I did not rule interference in this case, since I felt the BR needs to come out of the running lane at some point to touch the bag. (Double base not being used). Partner felt the same.

Losing coach came over while we were changing in the parking lot and asked if interference could/should have been ruled.

Did I make the right call?

Judgement call. So yes, from what you described, I would say that you probably did make the correct call, though of course, it is a HTBT kind of play. You are right in saying that at some point the B/R needs to leave the lane in order to touch the base.

Scott

Mike and everyone else got it right.

We had an overzealous umpire that decided on the field that the interference call killed the entire play and wanted to nullify the force out at the plate and return all runners to their bases. This would have resulted in only one out and bases still loaded. :eek:

Fortunatley, his partner got to him and they ruled correctly, two outs, runners on second and third.

Please note, I'm not debating the call here. I have no problem with the call.

What I want to talk about is why people think the BR needs to come out of the lane at some point to touch the base.

In a perfect diamond layout, approximately 3" of the base is included in the running lane allowing that the chalked lines would be considered part of the lane.

There is no requirement for the runner to hit the center of the base. For that matter, the farther inside the line the runner touches the base, the more likely there is with contact with the player covering 1B. The prime part of the base for the BR to contact is the outside, front corner.

Now, I know you are all going to tell me that we rarely see the perfect diamond layout. Hell, around here we rarely see ANY lines. But think about. Is there really a necessity for the BR to have any part of their body other than maybe the left foot at any given time?

"There is no requirement for the runner to hit the center of the base."

Fundamentals of Base Running 101. Teach the player to hit the center of the base with either foot when running through the base. Reduces the chance of ankle injury if the runner strikes the edge of the base.

WMB

Rubbish. To me, that's lazy coaching. With some of the bases out there now, it is more dangerous to hit the bag anywhere near the center. Even more so with many of the players not being properly coached on the mechanics of a defender taking a throw at first base. You want to talk about ankle and knee injuries, that's where they occur.

Players should be taught to hit the outside edge of the bag. Even way back in the '60s players when I was just a pup :) we were taught to always keep part of the foot in the dirt if possible. This allows for better traction and body control when done properly.

WMB, I understand what you are saying, but I don't agree with the philosophy. Never had, probably never will. It's no different than sliding (or anything else done on the ball field), learn to do it right, and it's one helluva tool.

I agree with Mike here.
http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/mica/Cartangry.gif Warning RANT ahead.

http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/mica/ranton.gif
I see too many F3's playing with their foot stuck smack in the middle of the base and too many runners trying to plunk their foot down in exactly the same spot. That's why there's all the clamor for two first bases. If coaches would teach their F3's to use the inside edge of the base and their BR to step on the outside half of the base then a single base would be perfectly adequate (is that an oxymoron??) for 90% of the plays at 1st.

If people are so worried about collisions at 1st then they should just move the orange base about 4 feet to the right or teach their players the proper way to field and run.
http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/mica/rantoff.gif

SamC

So many of our difficulties as umpires arise from the fact that players don't know how to play the game. When players lack the fundamentals, they produce all kinds of plays that don't fit neatly into the rules we have studied.

Obstruction and interference are often difficult calls. But whereas we might have just a handful of those calls over a decade, we now see them regularly. I saw more in one JV high school softball game than I did in my entire baseball career.

We see a ground ball to F6 with a runner on 2B. And then we see both the runner and the fielder do something illogical and unexpected. So at the resulting tangle we wonder, "What in the world did I just witness?"

We see runners tripping over the front of the plate and falling over catchers who are standing on the plate with the ball at the backstop. (Hey, Blue, she's got to slide!!)

The running lane rule was written by people who expected F3 to be fielding the position in some kind of logical manner, and the runner to be sprinting toward the outside of the bag. The book play is easy to call, but how often do we really see it?

We see F3 standing with both feet on the middle of the double base and the BR inside the line and then slowing down to stick a foot on the base and not overrun it. Oh, yes, F4 gets over there and enters the mess, too.

Mike:

I agree in principle with much of what you said. However, the problem is all too often what you stated in your response to WMB, namely "lazy coaching." (As was also stated by Sam C in his eloquently made "rant.") If all coaches had to attend clinics on how to teach the fundamentals of the game, then our jobs would be so much easier. All too often, though, I see fielders who are coached to stay on the bag in anticipation of a possible play, when in reality all it does is place them that much closer to an obstruction call. I see fielders who are taught to block the bag from the runner, often by the same coaches who gripe the loudest when there is a train wreck at first base. Therefore, in situations like we were discussing, when I see a runner who has used the running lane right up until her "move to the bag," I am going to give her the benefit of a doubt and not ring her up on interference in the play that we were originally discussing.

Is there really a necessity for the BR to have any part of their body other than maybe the left foot at any given time?

In a perfect world, where every kid is taught good mechanics and the fundamentals of the game, no there isn't.

In a world of moms and dads who are rec league coaches or travel coaches, who can say?!

Scott

I LOVE it!! All you guys give great responses. Hey Sam, I really like the 'rant' with the old geezer!! LOL

Agreed! Like I said, I didn't have a problem with the call. I just think we, as umpires, shouldn't just automatically assume the runner needs that last stride very far inside the line.

IOW, we know it happens, we are going to see it happen, and we should wait and evaluate the situation when it happens, not necessarily have it etched in our brain that we should expect it to happen and automatically give the runner the benefit of the doubt without thinking about it.

Actually, if the runner's foot comes down on the ground and only brushes the edge of the base, the call is safe. And guess what, if the runner misses the edge by 1/4" or maybe 1/2", we can't see that from an inside the diamond angle, still safe.

Does the "neighborhood play" have any traditional use in softball? This is a practical unwritten adjustment to the rules that high school age and up baseball uses to allow fielders to get the out while staying out of the way of the runners. I don't recall it ever being discussed on a softball rules board, so my assumption is that it is not an accepted practice in softball. Maybe metal cleats has something to do with it.

What about it?

Well, this thread has been completly hijacked!

Tom, I have heard that the NCAA and the JC level expects the "neighborhood" call to be made, especially at second base on a double play attempt. I don't work either level, just heard this from talking to some local guys that do. Maybe the Kellerumps or Del-Blue can comment.

Ok, I guess I'll get in on this. I'm not really doing anything at work right now.

First of all I almost gave the same answer as Mike did. I also have to wonder why everyone keeps saying the runner has to exit the lane to touch the bag. Just can't agree.

Now to answer Andy. I have never given the "in the neighborhood" call in any NCAA game. I think a couple of the college coaches around here would go ballistic.

I always get a kick out of the upper leagues in slow pitch who always say. Come on blue you gotta give us that call.

Tag the base, I'll give you the out.

Ok, I guess I'll get in on this. I'm not really doing anything at work right now.

First of all I almost gave the same answer as Mike did. I also have to wonder why everyone keeps saying the runner has to exit the lane to touch the bag. Just can't agree.

Now to answer Andy. I have never given the "in the neighborhood" call in any NCAA game. I think a couple of the college coaches around here would go ballistic.

I always get a kick out of the upper leagues in slow pitch who always say. Come on blue you gotta give us that call.

Tag the base, I'll give you the out.

You can tell it's raining in Northern Delaware. Let me see? Nothing going on at work, no golfing in the rain and apparently no softball this afternoon or evening. Sounds like the perfect time to get on a computer. :)

Mike,

Just got a call from Diane, First round postponed until tomorrow. Henlopen was still on. Kappa and Mason still have to go downstate to find out it's too wet.

<b> Begin Rant

The emphasis in College Softball is to get the call right.....PERIOD.

Since I'm on a roll........

Someone mentioned robotic like mechanics and signals....Yes there is that to a certain degree, but it's not limited to just college softball umpires. There is little to no room in Umpiring at that level for individualism. You are a professional.....You show up, do your job and go home...It's becoming big buisiness with alot of stress to go along with it.

If you want to be an individual then call a local league where no one really cares or knows how an umpire is supposed to act.

End Rant </b>

Time to go back to work.

I think that is pretty much the emphasis at all levels... and all sports.

So the question becomes, is the "neighborhood call" right period or wrong period?

In my personal opinion, if the throw is good (it doesn't cause the player to leave the bag in order to make the catch), and the footwork at the bag is smooth (no obvious attempt to touch a bag that the fielder felt was missed), and there is some motion toward and in close proximity of the bag (a foot drag or a step within inches of the base)... the fielder is going to get the call. And it is the right call... period.

Forcing the fielder to stand on the bag, look away from the play to find the bag, stomp in the middle of the bag, or any other action that could cause a collision (because the base runner is also coming at the bag) is wrong... period.

Now I realize there is some area of judgement between these two situations and that is where the umpire earns their money. Part of this judgement area is "Where is the runner?" Are they going to be well out or are they going to be close... or safe. What is "proximity" - is that 3 inches or a foot? More judgement.

If using the term "neighborhood call" is a round-about way of asking "If the fielder misses the base are you going to call the runner out?" The answer is an emphatic NO!

IF the fielder doesn't fulfill the smooth continuous motion close to the bag as decribed above, they shouldn't get the call.

Of course each umpire has there own abilities and understanding of the game and these are just my opinions. The fact of the matter is that for the runner to be out, the fielder has gotta touch the base. If I can't reasonably say the fielder touched the base, then the runner is going to be safe.

:D

If in the vicinity calls or expected, then would <u>we Blues</u>
not have to determine which, the defense or the offense was there
first? If making calls by in the vicinity, then we would have to
be fair. My play on this has always been "touch it prior to runner
arriving, get the out," no touch, no, this is not horseshoes.

glen

I disagree, the hell with work :)

Actually, I don't think the umpires I see working NCAA are all that robotic or similar in mechanics (signal-wise). Now, I'm known as being somewhat robotic, but that has never brought me any complaints or criticisms.

Presently, there is no such animal as an NCAA softball umpire. They are softball umpires who work NCAA games. No one is specifically trained as a NCAA umpire, but there are umpires trained in the NCAA rules and prescribed mechanics. So far, from what I've witnessed on the field, many of those prescribed mechanics can vary by region, but they all achieve the same purpose and the differences would most likely only be noticed by veterans.

I would say it is a fair statement that most NCAA umpires received their developmental training from ASA or NFHS with some converting from baseball.

I could be off, but I don't believe by that much. I'm sure Mr. & Mrs. Keller will set me straight.

I think that sums it up pretty damn well, Mike!

Scott

<b>Presently, there is no such animal as an NCAA softball umpire. They are softball umpires who work NCAA games.</b>

Not entirely correct. To work in the Major NCAA conferences, you must be evaluated and hired. There is more and more pressure being placed on us to work only NCAA games...be it D1, D2, or D3. It doesn't matter. Basketball and Baseball officals face the same problems. With the travel commitments we must make, its not really worth it to work other "Spring" ball.

<b>No one is specifically trained as a NCAA umpire, but there are umpires trained in the NCAA rules and prescribed mechanics. So far, from what I've witnessed on the field, many of those prescribed mechanics can vary by region, but they all achieve the same purpose and the differences would most likely only be noticed by veterans.</b>

Right now that is true but it is changing very very quickly. Further, that can be said about any other college official.

There is a huge training commitment that a serious umpire must make. Next year for the first time ever the NCAA is having regional rules/mechanics meetings next spring just like basketball/baseball officials have the last several years. Umpires that work in the Major D1 conferences will be required to attend these meetings. Further, we are being evaluated on a more consistent basis and those that are not following the NCAA way of doing things face the prospect of being dropped.

Like I stated, College Softball is becoming big buisiness. That not only means bigger paychecks :) but also alot more stress and expectations :(

Once again I will say that we have been extremely lucky. We were in the right place at the right time and met the right person that liked what he/she saw and gave us a chance. Further, we live in a very umpire rich area and have been successful in surrounding ourselves with top level ASA, ISF, and NCAA umpires and friends.

Time for bed.

Please understand, I was in no way attempting to degrade those who work college ball.

I'm well aware that the NCAA is making a move toward gathering control of their softball umpires, though I do not agree with the "collegiate ball only" trend of thought.

The NCAA has no standard system(yet) upon which to rate the umpires, that is done by the associations to which the umpire belongs and probably some conferences have advisors who do the same. And if the associations want to still be included in the long haul, they will be quite strict and well-heeled in their effort to put the best umpires on the field. There is also no standard for obtaining umpires for ball games. Some still contract locally, some conferences contract for the member schools and so on.

However, you can rest assured that the NCAA will have their claws into this within the next couple of years.

My only problem with it is that many schools still play the afternoon games on weekdays. That means there are still some pretty decent umpires omitted from the groups as they have real jobs which to not permit them to travel or work during certain times of the day. http://www.mansun-nl.com/smilies/mecry.gif