![]() |
Quote:
SamC |
Quoting from the 2002 NFHS Rule Book:
<b>"Point of Emphasis 2. Awarded Bases - 3-Foot Lane - When there is a base-on- balls award, the batter-runner is required to use the 3 - foot running lane. A walk is treated the same as a batted ball. When the batter-runner runs outside the three-foot lane and, in the judgment of the umpire, interferes with the fielder tking or receiving a throw to first base, interference shall be called. glen |
I realize this thread is three weeks old, but I decided to re-read this post after Dakota make a typical derogatory statement on another board ("they (NFHS) have the diamond sports world's dumbest possible interpretation of a running lane violation after a base on balls.")
It seems as though half of this thread was in trying to define the ASA position, and half was NFHS bashing. I think that maybe Cecil was the only one that had it right by saying "its history, folks!" From a NFHS perspective, I agree that a walked batter (batter-runner) can not be charged with interference prior to reaching 1B. I base that on my 2003 books. 8.2.5 says a batter-runner is out if: "She runs outside the three-foot lane and, in the judgment of the umpire, interferes with the fielder taking the throw at first base. And 8.2.6 says that: "A batter-runner being hit with a thrown ball does not necessarily constitute interference. ASA has the indentical wording, except that "she" is replaced by "batter-runner." Both books say that a batter becomes a batter-runner when a fourth ball is called by the umpire. NFHS Casebook 8.2.6, covering a slightly different situation, states that "Since no play is made on (batter-runner) at first base, 8.2.5 does not apply. I believe I can take that statement and apply it to a walked batter-runner when the catcher is throwing the ball to 1B. Because the B-R has been awarded 1B, no play can be made on her until, and if she goes past 1B. (ie., trying to draw a throw and get a runner home from 3B.) Thus the catcher is simply trying to relocate the ball for a future possible play should the batter try to advance. Thus - if no play is being made on the B-R at 1B, 8.2.5 does not apply. I believe that is the NFHS position in 2003. Does anyone have access to anything (written) that disagrees? WMB [Edited by WestMichBlue on Sep 25th, 2003 at 12:01 AM] |
All this discussion is because of an interpretation that was posted on the NFHS web site at the beginning of last year, and was also past out in pre-season literature at least in S.C., that stated this official interpretation. The interpretation specifically mentioned the play in question.
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:53pm. |