Runner out or safe
 

R1 on 1B and leaves at the release of the pitch. B2 hits ball that touches F1 glove and then hits R1 while sliding toward 2B. F4 would have caught the ball for a close out if the ball had not hit R1. See FED rules 2.47.3a and 8.8.6. Both rules could apply with differing results. Please cited rule you are using when giving your opinion.

Based on your description of the play I dont know how a runner who is sliding into a base would be able to avoid a ball that has been deflected. I would say 8-8-6 applies and the runner is not out.

2.47.3a is a definition to be used when applying rule, not a rule in itself.

Please cite a rule which would determine the runner to be called out.

See 8.6.10a. 2.47.3a is the definition of initial play. Rule 8.6.10a says "the runner is out if the runner interferes with a fielder attempting to make an initial play".

And 8-8-6 says the runner is not out if they could not avoid contact with the ball if it has been touched by any fielder, including the pitcher.

Yep.

How is being hit by a deflected batted ball interfering with a fielder?

Have you ever called a runner out who was running between bases and the ball hit her even though she tried to jump over it?

Completely different situation than you originally posted. Yes, have called out plenty of runners for being hit by a batted ball before it passed an infielder. I have also had several situations where the ball was deflected and the runner had no ability to avoid the ball. The rule is pretty clear, if the ball was touched and the runner could not avoid contact they are not out.

Well I hate this part of the rule or in this case the combination of the rules. But I have to agree with strike 4 on this one. The runner would be out. By the citations that were given that fielder is still in the act of making an initial play per the defination so it is still INT. Again it gives me heart burn but as I have been told when I argued it....that's the way the rules are written.

See page 67, rule 8.6.10a reads "The runner is out if runner interferes with a fielder attempting to make the initial play on a fair batted ball (2.47).

See page 25, 2.47.3a. Definition of initial play is: "Initial Play. A fielder is considered to be making an initial play on a fair batted ball when she has a reasonable chance to gain control of a ground ball that no other fielder (except the pitcher) has touched".

It is interference based on the definition of initial play and rule 8.6.10a.

See why I posted this question.

Then why is rule 8-8-6 in the rule book and specifically lists including the pitcher?

Now you see why I ask this question. You have two rules that seem to be in total conflict. I hope others will comment on this situation.

This is the "hole" between the rule about making an initial play and being contacted by a deflected batted ball.

The only thing I see, and this is not an official interp, is that the 8-6-10a says ".... interferes with a fielder attempting to make the initial play on a fair batted ball..."

Does that imply that there must be some sort of contact or interaction between the runner and the fielder beyond just the runner being contacted by the deflected (by the pitcher) batted ball?

Andy, just sent you an email about this. I noticed the same thing in the rules clarifications for 8-6-10. When it discussed a deflected ball it only referenced the runner making contact with the fielder, not the ball.

Here's how I understand it and the way I reconcile the rules.

There's two things you can interfere with. You can interfere with the ball or you can interfere with the player. And the rules reference each separately.

If you run into the player who is fielding the ball, then you're going to be out because the rule protects them throughout the initial play.

If you run into the ball (or it runs into you), then we have a few variations (The third is this scenario):
if it is untouched and behind a fielder with no other fielder having a chance to make an out, you're fine unless it's intentional.
if it is untouched and behind a fielder with another fielder having a chance to make an out, you're out.
if it is deflected, you're fine unless it's intentional.
In the first two cases, the pitcher doesn't count as a fielder. (Otherwise the ball would always be past her by the time it hits you.)

young ump,

re:scenario 1;

even if the runner runs into a fielder who has drastically altered her direction of travel due to the deflected ball (and runner cannot avoid contact)?

Rule 8 Section 6 A runner is out. Article 10 The runner interferes (a)with a fielder attempting to make the initial play on a fair batted ball.

Rule 8 Section 8 A runner is not out. Article 6 A runner is hit with a fair batted ball after it touches or is touched by, any fielder, including the pitcher, and the runner could not avoid contact with the ball.

The rules do not conflict at all they cover 2 different situations.

R1 on 1B and leaves at the release of the pitch. B2 hits ball that touches F1 glove (initial play)and then hits R1 while sliding toward 2B. F4 would have caught the ball for a close out (please explain what you mean a close out) if the ball had not hit R1.

A close out means that if the runner had not been hit by the ball, the fielder could have caught the ball and made an out, but it would be a bang bang play.

Which situation covers my play? Would you call the runner out or safe in this play? Please cite which rule you would use to make your call.

The rule does NOT say "interferes with a fielder's attempt..." it says "interferes with a fielder attempting..."

The interference must be with the fielder (not necessarily by contact). In the play described, the runner is merely contacted by a deflected batted ball. The fielder is not interfered with.

8.8.6 is the ball hitting a runner who would be out except for the deflection.

8.6.10 is INT with a fielder, as in hindering movement, contact with the fielder that prevents fielding, etc.

8-8-6 is the only rule to use on this play plain and simple

There's a difference between interfering with a fielder and interfering with the path of the ball.

It's not. Getting hit by the ball is one rule. Interfering with a FIELDER is a different rule.

You say that like I'm forgetting something but if so I've forgotten it. As I understand it (it being the offseason and all), yes, a fielder making an initial play is protected from being interfered with even unintentionally.

Thanks for all the comments. They caused me to think a little deeper about the rules.

Based on some of the comments, let me add an additional thought to the question. Would it make a difference in how you ruled if the charging fielder stopped or slowed down because the runner slid between her and the ball on an initial play? Is contact necessary before you would call interference?

Contact is not necessary - what you describe would be interference with a fielder. Which would be illegal if the fielder was making an initial play.

I thought we were talking about a runner being struck by the ball they could not avoid. Is the fielder stopping really a different question? I understood strike4's last post as the same as OP, with the fielder recognizing the situation.

That is correct.

No it would not the initial play is over once the ball was deflected.

Are you just trying to get us all to call an out no matter how legal the play is???

No, even a ground ball being an initial play is not changed by the pitcher.

Yes it is if it was deflected as in the OP re-read my rule reference post

Here is the definition of initial play. What do you think after reading it? I am just getting opinions on the play. I hate this play.


See page 25, 2.47.3a. Definition of initial play is: "Initial Play. A fielder is considered to be making an initial play on a fair batted ball when she has a reasonable chance to gain control of a ground ball that no other fielder (except the pitcher) has touched".

That is true but you still seem to want to adjust the question over and over without enough information!
You said the fielder slows down and the runner slides between them. Is she sliding into the base between the bases why did the Fielder slow down and so on that is the problem with what ifs.

I think the problem here is that Strike4 asked a question without specifying the context. Re-state the new scenario you want a ruling on, and we can respond.

Remember, though... interference with a FIELDER is ruled on via one rule; interference with the ball is ruled via a different rule (or rules, really). Often the ruling is the same, but we're discussing here (at least in the OP) one of the times it's not.

Here is the new scenario:


R1 on 1B and leaves at the release of the pitch. B2 hits a ground ball that touches F1 glove and then hits R1 while sliding toward 2B. F4 stops just prior to running into R1 who is between her and the deflected ball. F4 would have caught the ball and tagged 2B for an out if the ball had not hit R1. Is this interference and R1 out? Would it have been interference if F4 had not stopped and ran into R1 while trying to get to the ball?

You cite FED rules in your original post, is it FED rulings specifically you are looking for? Under ASA rules once a ball is deflected the runner must do something intentional to interfere.

That is my problem with the wording of FED rules. Under 8-8-6 it recognizes on a deflected ball the runner does not necessarily have the ability to avoid being hit by the ball, yet under the strict wording of 8-6-10 they technically would be responsible for avoiding a fielder who is going after a deflected ball by the pitcher, but not any other fielder.

It is not INT with a fielder if an unavoidable deflected ball hits the runner.


If that occurred ITUJ before the ball hit the runner, then INT. If that, then it no longer matters if the ball hits the runner, already dead.

First off, you need to stop referring to F4 being able to catch the ball. That implies that the ball is still in flight. Not that it really makes any difference in the play itself, but the proper way to describe the play is that "...F4 would have fielded the ball and tagged 2B..."

Now, you say that R1 was hit by the batted ball as she was sliding into second base. Hmmm... I'm not sure I'm seeing F4 being able to field the ball and tag second base ahead of R1 if R1 is already into her slide here.

This one is so bang-bang, I would have a hard time ruling that R1 interfered with F4 before the deflected ball hit her while she was sliding into second. I would have to clearly see that F4 stopped or jumped back to avoid R1 before R1 slid into second base to rule interference.

You are correct in in the "fielded" wording. I think you see my point on the bang-bang part that makes this play a problem. Thanks.

Initial play is irrelevant to the scenario in the OP.

A few years ago, I had ask our state (Texas) rules interpreter the difference between these two rules (2-47-3 and 8-6-10) to determine "Initial play or a Deflected ball" for a hit ball.

Rule's Interpreter advice
"You ask yourself, who caused the ball to hit the runner, if it was the defense, the runner is not out, if the runner prevents the defense from playing their game, it is an out."

Was that Walter? Sounds like him.

Given that the ball hit the runner - the fielder stopping is nothing - they had no ball to play. (See interception and catchable ball nonsense on the Gronkowski play... :) )

Question to the peanut gallery on Strike's follow up question --- if the ball hit R1, and then R1 and F4 collide... don't we have obstruction (and likely a quite pissed off coach!)?

Interesting ... given that he typed CAUGHT or CATCH multiple times, I'm envisioning an airborne ball during this entire play - deflected but still in the air...

I'm going to ask you to explain this.

Initial play (as defined in FED rules) is the centerpoint of this whole play.

Obviously for the newbies you mean if F4 hindered the runner!
The OP implies already reaching 2nd.

It's the OP perception that it is the centerpoint. This is a deflected batted ball hitting the runner not in contact with a base. It is not interfering with a fielder attempting to field a batted ball on the initial play.

pull the word "act" on these boys.

OK, I found this. comment if you think this does or does not apply.

this reads as an initial play per the casebook 2.47.3B.

in this case, it states that if the ball deflects off the pitcher, it is still considered an initial play. however the case refers to a runner contacting the fielder after a deflected ball. it is not addressing a runner being struck by that deflected ball.

per 2.47.3B, if it is deflected off of any fielder other than the pitcher, it is no longer an initial play.

Again, and again and again.........there is no interference with the fielder, so the initial play issue is irrelevant.

I'm stunned that this thread has become 4 pages of actual umpires (not fans and coaches) who don't see the glaring difference between interfering with a fielder and getting struck by a ball (or interfering with a ball). They are treated completely differently.

who said interference? there is no "act". didn't you take everyone on that road before?

in the casebook, there was contact w/ the fielder, so that was the act. this is a deflected ball, but the casebook calls it an "initial play". let you guys reconcile that.

I just posted what I found. I don't even work HS.

Apparently, it is a reading comprehension thing. :)