What do you have!

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by Dakota

My point is not that it is not authoritative, but that the softball rules interpreters have a track record of putting their hobby horses into official interpretations. Further, the rule does specifically mention fair batted ball, at least implying that the rules committee/writers were making a distinction. It is generally a lot easier to add an interpretation to a case play than to change the rule, leaving case plays somewhat at the mercy of said hobby horses.

Well, I certainly can't address what those interpreters have done in the past, because I haven't been doing this long enough to know their previous track record. The only thing I can do is go with what is printed in an authoritative document, whether it be the actual rule book or the supporting case book.

Originally Posted by Dakota

It requires the umpire to read the mind of the BR/R and further to determine what "has a chance" or "could become fair" means. Where is the line here?

No different than other grey areas in the rules, Tom. Umpires have to decide what bases runners could have reached minus an obstruction. They have to judge whether or not another fielder might have made an out on a batted ball that gets by an initial fielder and contacts a runner. They have to read a runner's mind when she keeps running after being retired. It's why we get paid the big bux.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by Manny A

...No different than other grey areas in the rules, Tom. Umpires have to decide what bases runners could have reached minus an obstruction. They have to judge whether or not another fielder might have made an out on a batted ball that gets by an initial fielder and contacts a runner. They have to read a runner's mind when she keeps running after being retired. It's why we get paid the big bux.

Except that there has been a concerted effort in recent years to remove intent from all interference rules. There are one or two exceptions remaining, but this effort was based on the difficulty of reading minds. Basing the interference call on the act, not on the intent, has been the direction. That's another reason why this particular case play seems out of step.

[tcannizzo]

By rule, without requiring any mind-reading for intent, nor is it a gray area.

FOUL BALL: A batted ball that:
A. Settles or is touched (not caught) on or over foul territory between home and first base or between home and third base.
B. Bounds or rolls past first or third base on or over foul territory.
C. While over foul territory, touches the person, attached or detached equipment or clothing of a player or an umpire, or any object foreign to the natural ground.
D. While over foul territory, an offensive player interferes with a defensive player attempting to field a batted ball.
E. First hits the ground over foul territory beyond first or third base.
F. Touches the batter or the bat in the batter's hand(s) a second time while the batter is within the batter's box.
G. Goes directly. from the bat to any part of the catcher's body or equipment and is caught by another fielder.
H. Hits the pitcher's plate and rolls untouched to foul territory before reaching first or third base.