Running lane violation or game over?

[umpire george]

Game tied, bottom of 7th inning.
R1 on 3rd. base. Dropped 3rd strike on batter.
Batter runner is clearly in fair territory outside of running lane on way to 1st base when F2 throws ball over right shoulder into right field.
Running lane violation or game over?
Would your call be any different if it was raining and ball could possibly be wet?

[MD Longhorn]

Whose right shoulder?

Was it a quality throw (could F3 have caught it ... and if she could have but didn't, why didn't she)?

Rain and/or wet ball are irrelevant.

[umpire george]

Right shoulder of the batter runner. She's not running backwards...
Judgement call on the umpire as to running lane violation, Right?

[Steve M]

Originally Posted by umpire george

Game tied, bottom of 7th inning.
R1 on 3rd. base. Dropped 3rd strike on batter.
Batter runner is clearly in fair territory outside of running lane on way to 1st base when F2 throws ball over right shoulder into right field.
Running lane violation or game over?
Would your call be any different if it was raining and ball could possibly be wet?

You've got some of what you need in order to have a running lane violation. Was this a quality throw? Did the BR interfere with the fielder receiving the throw at 1B?
Would the call be any different if raining & maybe a slick ball? No - since the rain was not bad enough for the game to have been stopped. Although those conditions do make it more likely that it was not a quality throw.

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by umpire george

Game tied, bottom of 7th inning.
R1 on 3rd. base. Dropped 3rd strike on batter.
Batter runner is clearly in fair territory outside of running lane on way to 1st base when F2 throws ball over right shoulder into right field.
Running lane violation or game over?
Would your call be any different if it was raining and ball could possibly be wet?

Speaking NCAA...game over. 12.2.4.2
Other codes?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by umpire george

Right shoulder of the batter runner. She's not running backwards...
Judgement call on the umpire as to running lane violation, Right?

Kind of ... you didn't answer this:

Was it a quality throw (could F3 have caught it ... and if she could have but didn't, why didn't she)?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by KJUmp

Speaking NCAA...game over. 12.2.4.2
Other codes?

You don't have enough information yet.

[umpire george]

Yes, it was a "quality throw" in spite of the fact F3 had to miss the batter runner who was out of the running lane. Please give me definition of a quality throw. F3 would have normally caught it if batter runner was not in fair territory.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

You don't have enough information yet.

This is true.

Had the runner reached the 3' lane yet?
Was the double base in use?
Was the throw from foul territory on the 1B side?
Did the runner actually interfere with a defender's ability to receive the throw at 1B?

[BretMan]

Originally Posted by umpire george

Please give me definition of a quality throw.

One that is directed to a fielder at, or near, first base such that there is a reasonable expectation that the throw is catchable and that it would have recorded an out.

A throw that sails over the fielder, out of her reach, would not be considered as a "quality throw".

[x-tremeump]

I have to assume double first base, & I have to assume drop third strike F-2 is making the throw from foul territory. Assuming all of that the BR is helping the defense. Game Over.

[MrRabbit]

Originally Posted by xtreamump

I have to assume double first base, & I have to assume drop third strike F-2 is making the throw from foul territory. Assuming all of that the BR is helping the defense. Game Over.

As my old sergeant said if wish to live long enough to see tomorrow you will assume nothing. That goes double for umpiring.

But if you wish to use assume logic then bend over and spread them because you are about to get your assumed.

[umpire george]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

This is true.

Had the runner reached the 3' lane yet?
Was the double base in use?
Was the throw from foul territory on the 1B side?
Did the runner actually interfere with a defender's ability to receive the throw at 1B?

1. Yes, runner was at least 30 feet down baseline.
2. No, double 1st. base was not in use.
3. Throw came from foul territory on 3rd. base side.
4. Based on angle of throw and position of batter runner defender was, in my judgement, interefered with.

[x-tremeump]

As my old sergeant said if wish to live long enough to see tomorrow you will assume nothing. That goes double for umpiring.

But if you wish to use assume logic then bend over and spread them because you are about to get your assumed.

All we needed was facts not war stories.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by umpire george

1. Yes, runner was at least 30 feet down baseline.
2. No, double 1st. base was not in use.
3. Throw came from foul territory on 3rd. base side.
4. Based on angle of throw and position of batter runner defender was, in my judgement, interefered with.

Then you have interference. We were not there. Until you said where the throw was coming from, I think we were all having trouble seeing how a BR that far into fair territory could interfere with a quality throw. Now that we know where it was coming from, it makes a lot more sense. Assuming number 4 above AND a quality throw (F3 could reasonably be assumed to have made the catch had BR not been where he/she was), you have INT.