Need Help On Rule
 

Guy on first base.
Batter hits ball up the middle.

Runner is rounding third. Batter is rounding second.
The defensive player in outfield slid to get ball and kicked it under the fence.
(probably wouldn't have made it to fence if not batted).

Where do the runners go?

Simple
 

Ground rule double. Runners at 2nd and 3rd

On a batted ball touched in fair ground by a fielder?? :confused:

DeputyUICHousto:
So you are saying a player can intentionally kick a ball under the fence when they know darn well that person would get a homer out of it and force them into a ground rule double? That doesn't make sense.


Just found this though:
8-5-G EXCEPTION-1
When a fielder loses possession of the ball, and the ball leaves live ball territory or becomes blocked.
EFFECT: Each runner is awarded one base from the last base touched at the time the ball entered the dead ball area or became blocked.

Keyword on this OP and making the award is 'possession' (or not)

so what's the ruling? He didn't have "possession" but it is pretty obvious that without him kicking the ball under the fence, everyone would have made it easily.

So if I don't have "possession" ... I can just kick balls that get past me under the fence to force them into ground rule doubles?

?

Two problems with your response here.

1) Your original post doesn't say, suggest, or even imply that the player intentionally kicked the ball. The answer you got is the rule for the play you posed. If you want a ruling on a ball intentionally taken to dead ball territory, you need to ask THAT question.

2) The rule you cite has even less to do with this play than your now changing the play. The fielder you described never had possession, and therefore cannot lose possession.

Try again which rule you want to apply to which play.

The original play is 8.5-I(2),EFFECT.

Your intentional scenario is 8.5-K, EFFECT

8.5-G has nothing to do with either.

Just trying to find the correct answer.
It is not known if he "intentionally" batted it (only he would know that).

All players would have scored easily if it was not for him batting the ball.

I guess from now on, when a ball gets past me, I will just slide and "accidentally" kick the ball under the fence. lol

Confused?
 

Why?

The original post doesn't say the ball was intentionally kicked under the fence. The original post doesn't say the defender had possession of the ball.

What would you rule?

What happens if the right fielder is chasing a fly ball down the right field line in fair territory and while the ball is over fair territory it hits the end of his glove and goes under the fence? I see these two plays as the same call.

Ground Rule Double!

Wow
 

Do you believe the ball was intentionally kicked under the fence? Or did the defender make an attempt to field the ball and the ball hit his leg/foot and went under the fence?

Unless the umpire deemed it to be an intentional act then the only ruling you can make is a ground rule double. And since none of us were there we can only use the information available...sorry that you don't like the answer.

Well, like I said ... I guess when a ball gets past me, I will just slide and "accidentally" kick the ball under the fence.

I am not an official ... that is why I am asking.

Seems to me, that you should get 1 extra base from last touched bag when the ball was obstructed with. Seems like an odd ruling.

Answer my question.
 

Did the defender intentionally kick the ball under the fence in your judgment? Or, was he attempting to field the ball and muffed it and the ball hit him and went under the fence?

In your honest opinion which way did you see this play happen?

In all honesty ... it was a close call. Just not sure why he would slide to get the ball in the first place. That is what made it look odd.

Like I said, runner was rounding third at the time. The runner scored when his hands when up (for the ground rule double).

Just seemed shady to me.

I can tell you 100% that if he did not touch the ball there is NO WAY that ball would have gone under the fence.

This is irrelevant.
 

Let me give you scenario:

Bases loaded with two outs. A right handed batter hits a smash down the first base line. The fair batted ball bounces up and hits the first baseman on the shoulder and bounces over the dugout. Regardless of the fact that the ball hit the defender or the defender touched the ball this is a ground rule double.

Anytime a fair batted ball goes in to dead ball territory under its own momentum and as long as the act was not intentional you have a ground rule double. The exception to this would be if a fair batted fly ball goes off of a defender glove and over the home run fence fair you would have a four base error which would not count against the home run count.

From the way I read the OP this is pretty much the same play I described at the top of this post.

That is irrelevant to the rule. What matters is (1) did he have possession or was he still playing a batted ball, and (2) did he do this intentionally or not.

If the ball's status was still a batted ball, and if the umpire ruled this was unintentional, then the award for this is a 'book-rule double' (not a ground-rule double).

Sometimes, it may seem that the rules burn one team or the other. In this case, you think the offense got robbed of additional bases. There are other scenarios where the defense will think the offense got more bases than they deserved. But the ruling is the same.

Please see Rules Supplement...#26 I believe...its "Ground Rule Double"

Sigh....

You came here asking for a ruling on a play. Deputy is trying very hard to get you to answer the KEY question that needs to be answered to give you the right answer. Let me ask you this... If your runner hit a grounder, and ended up in an extremely close play at first, and you asked the umpire if your guy was safe or out, and he said, "In all honestly, it was a close call" - would you consider that an answer?

I know ... you're not an umpire ... but an umpire MUST know the answer to the question you're being asked in order to rule properly. You were there. We were not. So you must provide the answer. Or we cannot answer with the proper ruling.

"I can tell you 100% that if he did not touch the ball there is NO WAY that ball would have gone under the fence. " Please understand - this is ENTIRELY irrelevant to the situation at hand. Complain about what the rule is to someone else - we don't have the latitude to insert our personal choice of fairness on every situation ... we have the rulebook - and there is a rule to cover your situation. Fair or not - it is what the organization who created the rules you play under has decided will be fair in the majority of cases. There are a good number of rules that, when used in an extreme minority of situations, will seem "unfair" - but without them, we have anarchy.

Okay. Like I said, I will just accidentally kick the ball under the fence when it gets past me and let the official decide if it was "intentional" or not. Worth a shot according to the "rule".

Thanks for letting me know the rule. I do appreciate the help. Just sad that play was the last play in the championship game. We went back and next person popped out to end game.

Wow
 

Sometimes it's difficult to get children to understand.

I said I understand the rule. Just don't agree with it.

Thanks

If cheating is your bag, feel free.

I, for one, hope you try it, and film it, and post it here. Trying to "accidentally" kick something with enough precision as to get it out of play would be an impressive feat. More likely you'll give the trail runner extra bases than anything else. (And if you do manage to get it out, I suspect the umpire's going to see how precise you had to kick that ball and rule it intentional).

Hope you didn't blame the officials for your loss.

Actually
 

That's not what you said...my advice would be to grow up and just play the game.

It depends. If the impetus which caused the ball to leave playable territory was that of the batted ball deflecting off the player, it is a GRD, as previously noted.

If the player's kick was the impetus which propelled the ball out of play, it is two bases from the runners' location at the time of the kick.

July 2009 ASA Rules Clarifications:

PLAY: With no outs and R1 on 2B, B2 hits a line drive to F7. R1 is off on the hit and headed toward 3B when F7 misses the sinking line drive and knocks the ball forward on the ground in front of him. While running in and trying to scoop up the ball, F7 kicks the ball into the 3B dugout. When the ball entered the 3B dugout, R1 is two steps from 3B and B2 is not yet to 1B. Which bases should R1 and B2 be awarded?

RULING: R1 is awarded home and B2 is awarded 2B. The ball being kicked into dead ball territory would be treated the same as if F7 threw the ball into dead ball territory. Each runner would be awarded two bases from the time the ball left F7’s foot. (Rule 8, Section 5G)

^ it was ... his kick knocked it out of play. The ball was essentially stopped when he slid after it. When he slid, he booted it under the fence "propelling the ball out of play"

Sounds similar to our game. Interesting ... it didn't sound like he had "possession" of the ball in that case either.

Mike, that play doesn't really differentiate well - as the runners are getting 2 bases from TOP, and also 2 bases from TOK (time of kick? :) ). Since neither runner had advanced a base, the bases at TOP and TOK are the same.

Incidentally, 8-5G refers to live overthrown balls and blocked balls... where is the rule that tells us to treat an unintentionally kicked ball as a thrown ball?

Interesting.

Gee, we never would have guessed that.

Your point?

Where is the rule saying the runner has to go to 1st, 2nd, 3rd and then home in order to score a run? Then tell me where the rule is that tells us what a legal slide or errant throw is?

This is a different scenario than the one in the OP. Here, the ball deflects off a fielder. This is clearly covered by 8-5I(2). In essence, the ball's momentum is what caused it to go out of play. The fielder just happened to redirect that momentum.

That's not what happened in the OP play. There, the ball's momentum would not have caused it to go into DBT. It was the fielder's action that provided it the impetus to leave the field. You can't use 8-5I(2) here.

Again, that's not what happened in the OP. So you can't rule it a straight-up ground rule double or, more appropriately said, a two-base award from time-of-pitch.

If we can't use 8-5I(2), which rule do we use? The problem is, there is no specific rule that covers this. That's why ASA came out with the rule clarification that Irishmafia provided. And they cited 8-5G as the rule that most closely applies to this situation. Since 8-5G only applies to thrown balls, the clarification specifically tells us that a ball unintentionally kicked into DBT is treated the same as a throw.

So, the correct ruling for the OP is to award all runners two bases from when the fielder unintentionally kicked the ball under the fence.

Yeah, it kinda makes 8-5K moot. But on a thrown ball into DBT, the ruling is the same whether it is intentional or not. The real reason behind 8-5K is to provide a more severe penalty for situations where a one-base award would apply if done unintentionally, such as when a fielder catches a fly ball near a DBT boundary and then goes beyond that boundary, or when a catcher chases down an errant pitch and then sends it into the dugout.

But when it comes to batted balls, 8-5G is the best rule, per the ASA clarification, to use should a fielder provide the momentum to send the ball into DBT when the ball's momentum wouldn't have caused it to go out.

As I mentioned, there is no rule that specifically covers this. The July 2009 ASA Rule Clarification tells us to use 8-5G. Unless something has since come out that supercedes that clarification, that's what we have to go with.

So I guess I was right after all.
Thanks for the clarification.

I wasn't there and didn't see the play, I read the OP and thought, batted ball deflected by fielder into dead ball territory. Two bases from time of pitch.

The original poster has changed and added to the scenario since that point and doesn't seem top grasp the concept of "intentional" as related to judging player actions.

And remember....his team lost the game...all because of this call.....

I can't imagine anyone trying to intentionaly kick a ball under a fence in that or any scenario.

I find it amazing that after the discussion and evidence presented, there is still argument.

Just in the way of comparison with other rule sets, and this example has some holes in it also....

If the play as described in the OP occurred in an NCAA game, the ruling would fall under 9.9 Fair Batted Blocked Ball.

The rule contains no mention of an intentional/unintentional act of the part of the fielder, it only says "when it deflects," and then the umpires would essentially have to combine two sections of the rule to apply the correct ruling.

9.9 Fair Batted Blocked Ball
A fair batted ball becomes blocked:

9.9.3 When it bounces over, wedges under, or passes through a fence or any designated boundary on the field........
9.9.4 When it deflects off of a defensive player and crosses into dead ball territory.......

EFFECT-(9.9.2 to 9.9.4)-The ball is dead. The batter is awarded second base and credited with a two-base hit (double). Each runner is awarded two bases from the base legally occupied at the time of the pitch.

That is not a ground rule. It is a book rule.
And it depends whether you feel it was intentional or not. If not intentional, 2 bases for all from time of pitch. If intentional, then 2 bases from time of intentional "kick".

Except that the book calls it a ground rule! ;)

Agreed. As the line goes in a memorable movie, "You're KILLING me, Smalls!"

Colleagues, are you just blowing off the ASA Rule Clarification that OKC provided in July 2009 and Irish quoted?! They offered a case play that unequivocally tells us that the ruling is to award two bases from the time of the kick, not the time of the pitch.

This is NOT a deflected ball. A deflected ball is one that has significant momentum that, after it ricochets off a fielder, umpire, runner, base, whatever, the ball's redirected momentum takes it into DBT. It's pretty easy to determine when a ball has deflected off something, and not pushed or kicked or thrown out of play.

Think of the bat-hits-ball versus the ball-hits-bat a second time scenario. When a moving bat hits the ball, it's ruled one way. When the ball hits a stationary bat, it's another ruling. A deflected ball versus a ball provided added impetus is similar.

Regardless how you want to define a ball that has been deflected, the ruling for the OP is clear, at least in ASA. They provided it to us via a case play. Just because the ruling results in the same two-base award as at TOP is immaterial. If that we're how OKC wanted it ruled, they would never had said two bases from the TOK, and they would not have used 8-5G as the applicable rule.

Which fits with my OQ about a ball played by a fielder.

I didn't word that very well ..... I know the rule now thanks to you!! I just had a problem with that play even being possible in the 1st place. :D

Great thread!

" Each runner would be awarded two bases from the time the ball left F7’s foot."

In spite of what they tell you, players have a tendency to do what many think to be impossible, and I'm not talking about their play skills