Collision at First Base
 

NFHS RULES

F4 fields a ground ball as F3 falls on her face attempting to cover first base. F4, with the ball secured in her glove, uses approximately eight steps to win a foot race with the BR to first base. A split second after stepping on the bag, a collision occurs between F4 and the BR. The collision causes F4 to drop the ball. What say you... out or safe?

As long as F4 had possession of the ball at the time the base was touched, out. Subsequent action cannot negate that.

Of course, that doesn't mean MLB will not come up with an interpretation requiring a defender to take two complete steps prior to said release of ball to consider the play complete and allow the out to stand. :rolleyes:

I would concur with Irish that it is an out. The reason. The only thing I have read about a force out in the rules is that a force can be obtained by either tagging the runner forced to advance, or tagging the base the runner is forced to advance to while in possession of the ball.

As soon as F4 touched the base while in possession of the ball, the out occurs.

This does bring up the issue of a train wreck, vs interference by a retired runner though :>

Only for the OOO

The problem is that you could easily argue F4 didn't have control of the ball in her glove when she stepped on the bag and collided with the BR, and that's why it fell out. Hard to really tell when everything happens almost simultaneously.

Good luck trying to sell that though. :p

This brings up a play presented at the national school. Hard ground ball to the right of F3. F3 fields the ball and its a race to the bag by both the batter/runner and F3. F3 dives for the base and tags it with the glove, but as she does the ball pops out. The ruling presented is the out stands as the out occured the instant F3 touched the base with the ball in her glove.

Question I have is, if the ball popped out of the glove as the base was being tagged, did F3 really have control of the ball?

I would argue she didn't. And I would call Safe on this play. If you argue that she did have control the instant she touched the base with the ball in her glove, you would never have a Safe call when a fielder tags a runner and then loses the ball during the tag.

To me, you must maintain control after the tag of the base or the runner. I don't read anything different in the definition of Tag between tagging the base or tagging the runner.

And I would agree with you, if you did call the out on this play you will have an offensive coach headed for the parking lot. But, as I said this was presented at the ASA national school by one of the members of the national staff. As I recall their statement was the requirements for the physical tag of a runner and the tag of a base were not the same. For purposes of tagging the base as long as the fielder had demonstrated control prior to tagging the base, the out occured the instant the glove touched the base and the ball was lost after the out occured.

I still don't read anything in the Rule 1 definition of Tag that differentiates tagging a base or a runner with the ball in the hand or glove. Yes, you obviously can tag a base with any other part of the body, but that's not what we're talking about here.

If the fielder dives at the base with the ball in her bare hand, and when she contacts the base the ball immediately pops out of her grasp, I can't see how anyone would still rule an out. To me, she lost control the moment the ball contacted the bag; how can that be considered a legal tag?

Amateur Softball Association of America (ASA)
Rule 8, Section 2B (Batter-Runner is Out)

We have received several questions dealing with how long a fielder has to hold on to the ball on a force out if they tag a base or to retire the batter runner prior to reaching 1B. The ASA rules say that as long as the fielder has control of the ball and once they touch the base with the ball or any part of the body, the runner or batter-runner should be ruled out. The umpire must judge if the fielder had control of the ball when the base was correctly touched to have an out call.

Play:: B2 slaps the pitch toward the right side of the infield and F3 fields the ball with their bare hand and dives for 1B. In the base umpire’s opinion, F3 has control of the ball and is holding the ball securely while diving on 1B and touching it with the ball. As soon as F3 touches 1B with the ball, the ball rolls loose into foul ground.

RulingThis is a judgment call by the umpire in regards to F3 having control of the ball when touching 1B. The runner should be ruled out if the umpire judged the fielder had possession of the ball at the time of touching the base, regardless of the ball coming loose after touching the base. The issue is control for that split second that the ball touches the base. If control is established when the fielder touches the base B2 would be out.

Is it generally agreed (in cases like this) that when a collision is imminent and the defense is trying to make a play; that the offense (runner) is responsible for avoidance?

No. Why?

The runner is responsible for not being malicious. (Heck, for that matter, so is the defense)

There isn't anything there that isn't true for tagging a player.
Here's my take: by rule, if you have contact for a split second during contact we have an out. On the field, I'm incapable of splitting hairs that fine. A player who has control of the ball can touch it against something and still maintain control of it. So if a player has the ball knocked out of her glove by tagging a player or a base I'm likely going to judge that she didn't have control of it before hitting the player or base. That's the same for a base or a player. For that matter, it's easier to maintain control when tagging a base.

That play happened in an NCAA game 2 or three years ago and was protested.
The ruling was the same as youi were told at the national school.

Yes, it is a hard sell. I was't sure of ASA's take on it, but (if I can believe waht you say ;), ASA agrees.....

Freaking amazing.

I'll say it yet again: What's the difference between tagging a base with the ball in the hand or glove/mitt, and tagging a runner with the ball in the hand or glove/mitt, with respect to the definition of Tag in the rule book? To me, there is no distinction.

I guess I really have a problem rewarding a fielder who can't hold onto the ball in her hand or glove/mitt when placing a tag on an immobile base.

So if ASA wants this to be considered an out, then virtually everytime the ball comes out of the fielder's hand or glove/mitt when the tag is made on a runner, the ruling should be an out. After all, the definition of Tag does not provide a different criterion for control vis-a-vis touching a base or touching a runner.

It would be interesting to have more details. If the umpire judged that the fielder had control and tagged the bag and then lost control and called safe, then that seems like a losing protest. On the other hand if the umpire judged that there was no control then what's to protest.

ASA, NFHS, NCAA, ... pick your poison...

OK, for you counting-angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin types:

R1 on 1B. B2 slaps the pitch toward the right side of 2B and F4 fields the ball with her bare hand, runs toward 2B, and dives toward 2B. In the base umpire’s judgment, F4 has control of the ball and is holding the ball securely. F4, with her hand outstretched, and R1 are both converging on 2B at about the same time.

a) F4 dives on 2B and touches it with the ball. As soon as F4 touches 2B with the ball, the ball rolls loose.
b) F4 dives on 2B and touches it with the ball. As soon as F4 touches 2B with the ball, R1 sliding in, and contacts F4's hand, and the ball rolls loose.
c) F4 dives as R1 is sliding into 2B. F4 touches R1's foot with the ball before she reaches 2B. As soon as F4 touches R1 with the ball, F4's hand contacts the base, and the ball rolls loose.
d) F4 dives as R1 is sliding into 2B. F4 touches R1's foot with the ball before she reaches 2B. As soon as F4 touches R1 with the ball, the ball rolls loose.

Rulings? Same, different, why?

If a base is touched by a fielder while controlling the ball in hand or glove with any part of her body when a runner is forced to that base/plate, the runner is out. The touch only has to be momentary while having control of the ball in the judgement of the umpire. How many times have you seen F3 field the throw, reach out and touch the bag, and immediately pull her foot back because the runner is going to run through the bag.

If a runner is tagged off of the base, the fielder has to tag the runner with the ball in hand or glove, AND show control of the ball before, during, and after the tag.

In a) touching the base made the ball come loose, at game speed, I'm not going to believe she had control before hitting the bag. Safe.
In b) the retired runner failed to go poof and made the ball come loose, that's interference :eek: Seriously though, I'm going with an out because I saw control when she tagged the bag and the contact with the runner was a separate action.
In c) I have the same thing as b though a much tougher sell.
In D) I have the same thing as a.

Too many arguing absolutes when this is obviously a judgment call and that is what you tell the coach. "at the time she contacted the base with her glove, she had control of the ball. Subsequent action is irrelevant to that determination."

There is no rule or interpretation of which I am aware that states a defender must untag or remove the ball/glove from the player or base to complete a tag.

Response in red in quoted section.

Touching the bag with any other part of the body while holding the ball in the hand or glove/mitt is not the issue. In those cases, you have clear, unequivocal evidence that the fielder maintained control of the ball after immediately pulling the foot off the bag.

Are you going to rule an out when the fielder immediately removes the foot from the bag, but then before she reaches into her glove to transfer the ball and throw to another base, she drops it? I hope not.

Rule cite, please. Where in the definition of Tag does it say that? And why is this different than the tag of the base?

As Irish said, this all boils down to judgment. And I will judge every time I see a fielder touch the base with the ball either in her hand or her glove/mitt and then lose it as not having control.

ASA definition: Tag
A legal tag is the act of a defensive player:
A. Touching a base with any part of the body while holding the securely and firmly in the hand or glove or:
B. Touching the runner or batter-runner with the ball while securely held in the hand or glove.

You, Irish, and me all agree that it is in our judgement. If all a defensive player has to do is touch the base to force a runner, if she has control of the ball when she first touches the base, I have an out. That's my judgement. If after she has touched the base controlling the ball, she drops it, I still have an out because she touched the base while controlling the ball. It's your judgement if she held the ball long enough or not to show control.

On a tag, in my judgement, she has to maintain contol of the ball before the tag, during the tag, and show control after the tag by showing me voluntary release. If I don't have those three things on an attempted tag, I don't have a tag.

I don't want to get into a seed spitting contest, but the fielder showing control is in our judgement as umpires.

My point with the "counting-angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin" comment.

At game speed, it would be very difficult (but not impossible, I guess) to judge an OUT call on any of my variations.

The discussion of absolutes is useful so long a people do not take it too far in application. It does identify the boundary conditions that can help with making the judgment.

I have been told that over the years and asking for confirm or deny.

Also, the runner is more flexible in path than a defender already in position.