The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sun Aug 03, 2003, 04:00am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 8
Situation:
Runner leaves 2nd when hit ball deflects off glove or body of pitcher and hits runner. Short is directly behind the runner attempting to field the ball.

Is the runner safe or out?
Does the contact with pitcher matter if it is body or glove?
Does contact with pitcher negate portion of rule which states "or another fielder has opportunity to make play"?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sun Aug 03, 2003, 04:02am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 8
interference addition

I forgot to say that the runner was hit by the batted ball
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Sun Aug 03, 2003, 08:09am
Tap Tap is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 96
runner hit by ball

If the ball hits the pitcher (body, glove, equipment, etc.) or other fielder for that matter, the runner will not be ruled out for interference unless the runner could have avoided contact with the ball. ASA Rule 8-8-F. I guess that's similar to the runner being out only if she/he intentionally contacted the ball, though the rule seems to place slightly more responsibility on the runner to make an attempt to avoid the ball. In practice, these may be nearly the same standards. If it looks like the runner tried to get out of the way or did not have the opportunity to do so, then no call.

In your situation, sounds like a no call.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 12, 2003, 08:48pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 19
I think if the shortstop had a reasonable chance to make a play, then the runner is out. If a batted ball deflects off of a fielder, but another fielder has a chance at a play, the runner will be called out in most cases, whether or not she tries to get out of the way.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 12, 2003, 09:14pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Maryland (northeast of Baltimore)
Posts: 369
It would seem that ASA 8-7-K would indicate that the runner is out if another player had a chance to field the ball in the situation you stated.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 12, 2003, 09:25pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,530
Quote:
Originally posted by TruBlu
I think if the shortstop had a reasonable chance to make a play, then the runner is out. If a batted ball deflects off of a fielder, but another fielder has a chance at a play, the runner will be called out in most cases, whether or not she tries to get out of the way.
Speaking ASA

I think Tap has it right. It basically must be an intentional act on behalf of the runner who makes contact with the deflected ball for the umpire to rule interference. Whether a defender has a play or not is irrelevent.

ASA 8.8.F
ASA Casebook 8.9-6
ASA Clinic Guide Page 49
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 12, 2003, 10:05pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: West Michigan
Posts: 964
I think that 8.4.F is a little more precise. "When a fair batted ball has been touched by an infielder, including the pitcher, and the runner did not intentionally interfere with the batted ball or the fielder attempting to field the batted ball. Effect: The ball is in play."

WMB
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 12, 2003, 10:25pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,530
Quote:
Originally posted by WestMichBlue
I think that 8.4.F is a little more precise. "When a fair batted ball has been touched by an infielder, including the pitcher, and the runner did not intentionally interfere with the batted ball or the fielder attempting to field the batted ball. Effect: The ball is in play."

WMB
Correct you are.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 12, 2003, 11:30pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Twin Cities MN
Posts: 8,154
Quote:
Originally posted by Little Jimmy
It would seem that ASA 8-7-K would indicate that the runner is out if another player had a chance to field the ball in the situation you stated.
No, 8-7K does not apply since the ball has been deflected. Notice 8-7K says, "When the runner is struck with a fair untouched batted ball ... "

The correct rule has already been cited.
__________________
Tom
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 13, 2003, 08:24am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 190
Talking

I think most of the time you will get the out on the runner that is hit, because they think they are out, and usually give up. This makes an out by the fielder almost certain. I have had this play many times during AA slowpitch.
__________________
Bob
Del-Blue
NCAA, ASA, NFHS
NIF
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 13, 2003, 10:20am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Posts: 3,100
The interference has to be intentional. ASA clarified this last year or the year before, as it was a bit ambiguous.

Now how about a runner who unintentionally interferes with a fielder attempting to field a deflected ball?
__________________
greymule
More whiskey—and fresh horses for my men!
Roll Tide!
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 13, 2003, 10:32am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Twin Cities MN
Posts: 8,154
Quote:
Originally posted by greymule
Now how about a runner who unintentionally interferes with a fielder attempting to field a deflected {batted] ball?
(ASA) If intentional & the fielder had an opportunity to make an out, the runner is out (Rule 8-7J.5). If unintentional, it is live ball, play on.

(Answer corrected with edit - I misread greymule's post; I missed the un in front of intentionally)

[Edited by Dakota on Aug 13th, 2003 at 01:18 PM]
__________________
Tom
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 13, 2003, 12:11pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 19
Intentional or unintentional, do you really want to make that distinction? If the ASA wants the ump to make every call on a runner hit by a batted ball based on the intent, they are asking us to take on an argument we don't need. 99 out of 100 times if a runner is hit by a fair batted ball and not in contact with a base, while a fielder has a chance to make a play, the runner will be called out.
__________________
"Softball games are like church: many attend - few understand"
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 13, 2003, 01:23pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Twin Cities MN
Posts: 8,154
Quote:
Originally posted by TruBlu
Intentional or unintentional, do you really want to make that distinction?
Want to or not, the rules required it.
Quote:
If the ASA wants the ump to make every call on a runner hit by a batted ball based on the intent, they are asking us to take on an argument we don't need. 99 out of 100 times if a runner is hit by a fair batted ball and not in contact with a base, while a fielder has a chance to make a play, the runner will be called out.
No, intent only needs to be ruled if the batted ball is deflected AND hits a runner AND another fielder had an opportunity for an out. The rule is to be fair to the runner - the runner is obligated to stay out of the way of the defense, but can't be held responsible for a deflected ball that changes direction suddenly. Therefore, intent on the part of the runner is required.

How do you guage intent? Some indicators are obvious - reaching out, etc. Others are more subtle - slow roller deflects off F1 toward F5. R1, running from second, has ample opportunity to go around F5 or the ball, but does not change path and is hit by the ball. Judgment - did the runner intentionally get in the way, or was there any indication the runner attempted to get out of the way?
__________________
Tom
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 14, 2003, 08:27am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Maryland (northeast of Baltimore)
Posts: 369
I stand corrected on my misreading of 8-7-K.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:28pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1