what happened here?

[SethPDX]

Originally Posted by RKBUmp

Looks to me like the catcher simply airmailed the ball into right field. Personally I have nothing on the play.

Nothing from me either.

[PATRICK]

I see no OBS at :39, runner was never hindered.
For that matter, runner was not hindered by PU either.
She's just looking for an excuse.

As for the baseball play, a case could be made for a running lane violation.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by PATRICK

I see no OBS at :39, runner was never hindered.
For that matter, runner was not hindered by PU either.
She's just looking for an excuse.

As for the baseball play, a case could be made for a running lane violation.

As for the baseball play, it's pretty clear cut nothing in everything but FED, and nearly as clear cut interference in FED.

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

As for the baseball play, it's pretty clear cut nothing in everything but FED, and nearly as clear cut interference in FED.

Really? I'm not sure I would have interference on this even in Fed? Why? When the throw actually gets to the first baseman, the runner is sort of back in the running lane. I can see an argument both ways on this, but I am still putting the onus on the catcher to have a throw close to the target. That throw was way off target, to the point I find it real difficult to award the defense an out for the RLV. Had the throw been lower or more in line with the base, then I might have a RLV, but that throw was so far off I'd have a hard time making that call.

[EsqUmp]

Another good example of why the NCAA should divide fly ball coverage regardless of whether an umpire goes out. U3 feels obligated to go out so that he can assume responsibility for the call. But in all reality, where can be possibly go? Open up, face the ball and make the call. No need to waste an umpire. Yes, he did what he should have per the CCA Manual. He only has a slit second to read the play before reacting. When in doubt, go out. And for those who say he took a funny angle, WRONG! He takes an approach that gives him a proper angle to see through the play, as opposed to running at the ball like so many umpires do. That is why I refuse to use the word "chase" to describe "going out." We aren't chasing anything. Players chase the ball. Umpires do not.

[BretMan]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

Really? I'm not sure I would have interference on this even in Fed? Why? When the throw actually gets to the first baseman, the runner is sort of back in the running lane. I can see an argument both ways on this, but I am still putting the onus on the catcher to have a throw close to the target. That throw was way off target, to the point I find it real difficult to award the defense an out for the RLV. Had the throw been lower or more in line with the base, then I might have a RLV, but that throw was so far off I'd have a hard time making that call.

Note that MD was commenting on the baseball play...

In FED baseball a "quality throw" is not required. If the batter-runner's presence out of the lane is the cause of the throw being bad (umpire judgment) then interference can be ruled.

FED softball does require a "quality throw" (ie: one that would have a reasonable chance of being caught by the fielder taking the throw).

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by BretMan

Note that MD was commenting on the baseball play...

In FED baseball a "quality throw" is not required. If the batter-runner's presence out of the lane is the cause of the throw being bad (umpire judgment) then interference can be ruled.

FED softball does require a "quality throw" (ie: one that would have a reasonable chance of being caught by the fielder taking the throw).

Key point is in red. In that play, I don't see the poor throw as a result of the batter runner's position, but as simply a poor throw. I am not awarding the defense on that play when the throw was so poor that there was no way to get an out. If it were not for the umpires judgment, of the cause of the poor throw, the catcher could simply see the better- runner out of the running lane and heave a throw to the right fielder, but claim it was because the batter-runner was out of the running lane.

I had a similar play in a youth (7-8 grade) baseball game this year (while being observed), which used HS rules. Bunt was laid down, and the runner was out of the running lane going to first (inside the diamond). The catcher picked up the ball and fired a shot about 15 feet over the first baseman's head. The coach came out arguing the runner out of the lane. I did not accept his argument and he eventually went back. After the game the observer said I was correct because in a reasonable umpires judgment, the bad throw was a bad throw, not one caused buy the position of the runner.