Batter runner/ 1st baseman contact

[Little Jimmy]

Utrip tourney but any rule set is good. My question is about a play that didn't happen, but I wondered what would have been the ruling if a different scenario took place. This is what did happen...

Batter hits a hard spinner about half way up the first base line in foul territory. It spins hard as F3 runs down the line. As BR is approaches, F3 touches ball in foul territory. Nothing but a foul ball.

But what if F3 picked up the ball in fair territory in this scenario and instead of simply waiting to put a tag on BR, she turns and attempts to beat the BR to 1st base. And as BR attempts to outrun F3, there is contact of the feet, with F3 falling and BR reaching 1st safely?

Do you have basic interference? Did she "illegally" impede F3? Doesn't the BR have a right to attempt to beat F3 in a footrace to the bag? Am I overthinking everything?

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by Little Jimmy

Utrip tourney but any rule set is good. My question is about a play that didn't happen, but I wondered what would have been the ruling if a different scenario took place. This is what did happen...

Batter hits a hard spinner about half way up the first base line in foul territory. It spins hard as F3 runs down the line. As BR is approaches, F3 touches ball in foul territory. Nothing but a foul ball.

But what if F3 picked up the ball in fair territory in this scenario and instead of simply waiting to put a tag on BR, she turns and attempts to beat the BR to 1st base. And as BR attempts to outrun F3, there is contact of the feet, with F3 falling and BR reaching 1st safely?

Do you have basic interference? Did she "illegally" impede F3? Doesn't the BR have a right to attempt to beat F3 in a footrace to the bag? Am I overthinking everything?

My opinion, you are overthinking the situation. I have no call in this play, much like a pass interference or no pass interference play in football. Just because the feet tangle, doesn't mean pass interference.

The BR has a duty to run to first base, and as long as she is not going outside the 3 foot allowable distance (out of the base path), then she has a right (and a duty) to run directly to the base.

I am also not awarding the defense for making a play that puts herself in jeopardy of losing control of the ball or being knocked down.

Now if there is an obvious push or malicious contact then we have an issue and the rulebook penalty (out, or out and ejection) will be applied as needed.

[Multiple Sports]

Incidental contact....no intent no call.....

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Unless I am completely wrong, I am reading the description of the play as follows: When F3 gains control of the ball in Fair Territory, I am assuming that F3 is between the B/R and 1B. If this is the case then B/R has committed interference whether or not the contact was intentional or not intentional. Intent is not required for interference to occur.

MTD, Sr.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Unless I am completely wrong, I am reading the description of the play as follows: When F3 gains control of the ball in Fair Territory, I am assuming that F3 is between the B/R and 1B. If this is the case then B/R has committed interference whether or not the contact was intentional or not intentional. Intent is not required for interference to occur.

MTD, Sr.

I think you are completely wrong.

Which "a batter-runner is out when..." subsection do you think this qualifies as? I just went through A-N one at a time, and this situation is not mentioned.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

I think you are completely wrong.

Which "a batter-runner is out when..." subsection do you think this qualifies as? I just went through A-N one at a time, and this situation is not mentioned.

MD:

Why is it not interference? If F3 is between 1B and the B/R, how is not interference for B/R to trip (intentional or not) F3 in order to reach 1B before F3 does?

MTD, Sr.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by Little Jimmy

Am I overthinking everything?

Probably, but challenging questions are our sustenance, even if SWP.