Softball Trivia

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

What does ASA Rule 8-2-I say?

That the batter is out if struck by an infield fly.

I have not found "the batter is out" on an infield fly.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

That the batter is out if struck by an infield fly.

I have not found "the batter is out" on an infield fly.

You don't need to. The batter is out. Ball is dead. There is NO other opportunity for an out. 1 out. Next batter.

[Tru_in_Blu]

The question of when the batter is out when she hits a ball that could be called an IF is when the status of the ball has been determined (fair or foul).

As mentioned in other posts, a ball could be hit in the infield where no one makes a play on it. It lands between 2B and the pitcher's plate and then spins foul between home and either 1B or 3B. At that point, the ball is foul, the batter is not out. So clearly, the batter is not out when the ball is struck or even when the umpire delcares an IF.

If a ball close to the 1B line hits the BR in fair territory, it's a dead ball and the BR is out.

If it was a super high fly ball and the runner from 3B was running on the pitch and touched home before the ball hit the BR, I think you score that run. Dissenters?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

If it was a super high fly ball and the runner from 3B was running on the pitch and touched home before the ball hit the BR, I think you score that run. Dissenters?

I hope the dissenters would be everybody. I'll ask again ... what does Rule 8-2-I say?

[HugoTafurst]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

I hope the dissenters would be everybody. I'll ask again ... what does Rule 8-2-I say?

That's what I have been wondering, myself.... especially since Dave the exact rule a week ago!

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

I hope the dissenters would be everybody. I'll ask again ... what does Rule 8-2-I say?

Just out of curiosity, when and why did 8-2-I change its wording? I have a PDF version of the 2008 rule book, and here's how 8-2-I was written back then:

"[Batter-runner is out] When an infield fly is declared. If the fair batted ball hits the batter-runner before reaching first base, the ball is dead and the infield fly is invoked."

The latest version of the rule runs both sentences together so that it reads,

"When an infield fly is declared and the fair batted ball hits the batter-runner before reaching first base."

Why the change? Heck, you could almost read it as saying that the ball HAS to hit the batter-runner to invoke the IFR!

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Manny A

Just out of curiosity, when and why did 8-2-I change its wording? I have a PDF version of the 2008 rule book, and here's how 8-2-I was written back then:

"[Batter-runner is out] When an infield fly is declared. If the fair batted ball hits the batter-runner before reaching first base, the ball is dead and the infield fly is invoked."

The latest version of the rule runs both sentences together so that it reads,

"When an infield fly is declared and the fair batted ball hits the batter-runner before reaching first base."

Why the change? Heck, you could almost read it as saying that the ball HAS to hit the batter-runner to invoke the IFR!

I see no quantitative difference between the first and the second, so I'm not seeing the issue. The latter is clearer, at least, and covers exactly the situation it's supposed to cover.

Regarding your last sentence, that's true. the ball HAS to hit the batter runner to invoke THIS rule. Luckily for all of us, there are many other parts to this rule to describe the other ways IFR might come into play.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

I see no quantitative difference between the first and the second, so I'm not seeing the issue.

Exactly, which is why I don't understand the rationale behind the change.

The older version is just as clear to me, if not more so.

[Umpteenth]

Originally Posted by Manny A

Just out of curiosity, when and why did 8-2-I change its wording? I have a PDF version of the 2008 rule book, and here's how 8-2-I was written back then:

"[Batter-runner is out] When an infield fly is declared. If the fair batted ball hits the batter-runner before reaching first base, the ball is dead and the infield fly is invoked."

The latest version of the rule runs both sentences together so that it reads,

"When an infield fly is declared and the fair batted ball hits the batter-runner before reaching first base."

Why the change? Heck, you could almost read it as saying that the ball HAS to hit the batter-runner to invoke the IFR!

That is how the rule is written. I'm sure that is not the intent.

I write for a living. I cringe each year as I read rule books, because often the rules are not worded well and do not impart the intent of the rule.

"When an infield fly is declared and the fair batted ball hits the batter-runner before reaching first base."
Worded this way, the batter-runner would NOT be out unless both pieces were true - infield fly must be declared, AND the fair batted ball must hit the batter-runner before reaching first base. A coach who has a grasp of English could argue this well (but would still lose, as we all understand the intent of the rule). But that is an argument we, as umpires, should never have to face. IMO, the rule was much clearer in previous editions.

[tcannizzo]

Originally Posted by Umpteenth

"When an infield fly is declared and the fair batted ball hits the batter-runner before reaching first base."
Worded this way, the batter-runner would NOT be out unless both pieces were true - infield fly must be declared, AND the fair batted ball must hit the batter-runner before reaching first base. A coach who has a grasp of English could argue this well (but would still lose, as we all understand the intent of the rule). But that is an argument we, as umpires, should never have to face. IMO, the rule was much clearer in previous editions.

Except that by rule, the IFF is in effect, even if it was not signaled/verbalized at the normal peak of the fly ball.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Umpteenth

That is how the rule is written. I'm sure that is not the intent.

I write for a living. I cringe each year as I read rule books, because often the rules are not worded well and do not impart the intent of the rule.

"When an infield fly is declared and the fair batted ball hits the batter-runner before reaching first base."
Worded this way, the batter-runner would NOT be out unless both pieces were true - infield fly must be declared, AND the fair batted ball must hit the batter-runner before reaching first base. A coach who has a grasp of English could argue this well (but would still lose, as we all understand the intent of the rule). But that is an argument we, as umpires, should never have to face. IMO, the rule was much clearer in previous editions.

This argument is asinine. Take your logic to any other rule...

8-7-B: "The runner is out when the ball is live and while the runner is not in contact with the base, the runner is legally touched with the ball in the hands of the fielder."

Therefore, by your way of reading the book, if a fielder catches the ball and steps on a base the runner is forced to, the runner is not out ... because all the pieces of 8-7-B have not been fulfilled.

Is this stupid? Of course it is ... because there are 24 other letters in rule 8-7.

It's just as absurd as the way you're parsing this rule. You're intentionally omitting the first (and most important) sentence and reading the 2nd sentence alone and out of context. The second sentence is merely a clarification of what happens in one specific instance, just as 8-7-b is one specific instance.

[Crabby_Bob]

.