Here's one for you

[MD Longhorn]

I have 2 outs here - ASA rules posted above.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

I have 2 outs here - ASA rules posted above.

I assume you're referring to the two rules I mentioned in my post above. I just don't know if it's appropriate to bunch two different rules together like that to gain two outs.

Suppose it was the on-deck batter and not the third base coach that intentionally interfered with the foul fly. You can obviously use ASA 7-6-I to rule the batter out. But I cannot find any rule that penalizes the on-deck batter for purposely preventing a DP, and rule the runner out as well.

So if it sounds like ASA doesn't support calling a DP should an on-deck batter (or other offensive player, for that matter) interfere here, can we hold the base coach to a different standard?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Manny A

I assume you're referring to the two rules I mentioned in my post above. I just don't know if it's appropriate to bunch two different rules together like that to gain two outs.

I see your point under normal circumstances, but in the case posted, the interference was with BOTH getting the batter out and making a play on the runner. This was a play that, had there been no interference, 2 outs would have been likely, and the offense interfered intentionally to prevent a double play. It is against everything that the interference rules are put into place to prevent, to allow the offense to benefit from doing something that is clearly against the rules.

Suppose it was the on-deck batter and not the third base coach that intentionally interfered with the foul fly. You can obviously use ASA 7-6-I to rule the batter out. But I cannot find any rule that penalizes the on-deck batter for purposely preventing a DP, and rule the runner out as well.

Again, I see your point. But what I said above still stands. There is every indication that the rules as written intend to prevent the offense from intentionally preventing a double play. I don't think it's a stretch to use rule 10 here. Clearly, this eventuality is not specifically written into the rulebook, and I absolutely hate falling back on Rule 10 - but not ruling 2 outs in this case is against everything that all of the interference rules are about.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

There is every indication that the rules as written intend to prevent the offense from intentionally preventing a double play.

Trust me, I agree with you. That is why I brought up using the two rules in the first place when rwest said you can't have a DP under ASA.

I just have a hard time justifying to myself that if I can't use one or the other to rule a DP whenever any offensive team member blatantly prevents a fielder from catching a foul ball, I can just combine the two of them. And even then, that really only covers a base coach.

[Tex]

Fed only,
Interference on a Foul Fly by Runner or Coach

Interference by runner: (8-6-10) Runner is out, strike to batter, batter still bats unless bunting on 3rd strike.

Interference by coach: (3-5-6) Batter is out, runner(s) return. If the interference prevented a possible double play, both the batter and the runner closest home is also out.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Tex

Fed only,
Interference on a Foul Fly by Runner or Coach

Interference by runner: (8-6-10) Runner is out, strike to batter, batter still bats unless bunting on 3rd strike.

Interference by coach: (3-5-6) Batter is out, runner(s) return. If the interference prevented a possible double play, both the batter and the runner closest home is also out.

Yes, but the question here is the on-deck batter.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by Tex

Fed only...

Tex, the FED question was already answered by rwest.

The issue was how ASA treats this. rwest said that ASA won't allow for a Double Play (batter and runner closest to home are out). I countered by proposing we use two ASA rules, 7-6-I and 8-7-O, to get two outs on the play. Not sure if that holds water.