Another one
 

Here is the situation.

2 out, 3-2 count on B3. B3 swings and misses, F3 drops the pitch. B3 makes no attempt to run to first, and starts walking toward the first base dugout.

The question is at what point do you call her out.

This was a discussion on another board.

Personally, as long as she is moving, I'm not calling her out until she does something else to prove she has no intention of advancing, such as entering dead ball territory.

What do other umpires use as a guide for making a decision on this.

Until she steps foot into dead ball territory, is tagged out or put out at first, she is not out.

Once she enters the "team area ", ie dugout, she's out.

I completely agree. Now, what do you do in this situation. She walks back toward the dugout, tosses her bat and helmet into the team area, and a team mate brings out her glove to her? She never actually goes into dead ball territory.

I only bring this up, because I heard about it happening recently.

Personally, at the point she has completely given up the idea of going to first, such as ditching the offensive equipment, at that point I'm calling her out, even if she does not go into dead ball territory. Then you also have the issue of taking off a batting helmet in live ball territory during a live ball situation.

I have no trouble with calling her out at that point either.

Speaking ASA, the BR is still a BR and capable of advancing to the base. Really don't care if the umpire "thinks" the runner has given up anything, that is not part of the rule. AFA the helmet, since this scenario makes it clear there is no obvious play, the player is in no danger.

So if there is no danger initially, there is no need to necessarily call her out. But once the defense gets the ball and is going to make a play, would you call her out at this point?

Speaking NFHS, the batter would be declared out once the half-inning ended because all infielders left the diamond. See Casebook 8.1.1 Situation A.

The idea of the rule is to protect the player, not a gotcha or free out. ASA instructs their umpire directly from the rule to use discretion as to the intent of player safety.

If there is no play being made anywhere, I'm not worried about it. If the defense does begin to make a play by throwing the ball, then yes, I will enforce the rule and call the player out.

In the OP, this was believed to be the final out of that half-inning, so I'm guessing the ball is on the ground the most of the defense is in or near their dugout, unless the OP tells me differently.

So, the moral of the story is that all infielders should sprint into foul territory if the 3rd out is a strike out, just in case. :D

A whole team of girls sprint off the field? Good luck with that! ;)

I agree with that. This is one of the few rules that has the "intent" built into it. No doubt because umpires were making egregious calls on the field. I saw an umpire call a batter out on an over-the-fence homerun. She took it off and flipped it up in the air right before she hit home plate. Ridiculous.

I get not worrying about the discarded helmet... however ...

One point asked and not addressed mentioned her receiving her glove and heading to her position. To me, this is clearly a player no longer running the bases, and she should be out at this point. If you don't call her out ... what happens if she happens to be F3, and heads to her position, stepping on first base. Are you going to stop everything down and rule her a legal runner on first base now?

Speaking NFHS, what rule would you apply?

Other than the traditional tag the batter out or throw her out at first, there are only three ways to get that out:
1) She enters dead ball territory.
2) She does not reach first base prior to the next pitch.
3) She does not reach first base prior to all infielders leaving the diamond.

If none of these occur (although I would think #3 would have occured), how do you call her out? Purposely removing her helmet is not an out and just a team warning or dugout restriction on second offense. I supposed you could make a case for interference when a team mates comes out on to the field, but that would be for interference and not for the action of the batter.

Not sure where you're getting your 3 here, and the accompanying assertion that these MUST be the only 3 ways an out can occur.

Essentially, in either code, for a BR who doesn't know she's a BR and stops trying to advance to first, we're talking about abandonment. I'm not a big abandonment guy, and I know several umpires like to use that FAR too quickly and FAR too aggressively. However, in THIS case - I believe it applies. And if a teammate tosses the BR her glove so that she can go play a position - that's a pretty clear indication to me of a player who has abandoned her wish to advance to a particular base.

No you really couldn't. After all, what are the teammates interfering with? Who are they hindering? What play is taking place?

More than likely, your #3 is what would happen. I can't imagine an infielder staying in fair territory while the BR goes over to her dugout, discards her helmet, and is handed her glove. If, by some chance, there is still an infielder in fair territory, and the BR makes it to first base with her helmet off and her glove on, I suppose the rules leave us no choice but to say she's still a viable runner.

NFHS Casebook 8.1.1 Situation A for the three ways.

This is not abandonment. Check 8-6-19:

A runner is out when...she abandons a base by entering dead-ball territory.

Definitely a "have to see it" kind of situation. Team mate could push or pull the batter-runner toward first base, or perhaps, as written in 8-16-6d:

The runner is out when...any coach or member of the offensive team, other than a runner, interferes with a defensive player's opportunity to make a play. This includes, but is not limited to...member(s) of the offensive team stand or collect around a base to which a runner is advancing, thereby confusing the fielders and adding to the difficulty of making the play. Members of a team include bat/ball shaggers or any other person authorized to sit on the team's bench.

But either one is still a have-to-see-it situation.

Hey, Andy, want to know what I think is funny? The way people are trying to mold a rule to fit what is perceived as a violation.

Not that there isn't possibly an issue, but the "what ifs" are funny.

+1