|
|
| |
|
| |
Nickname:
fuddrules
Posts: 299
Member Since: 6/26/05
Posted: 10/20/2009 1:55pm
Views: 418
Replies: 1
|
|
Learned something new?
|
Situation: Batter/Runner going to 1st with a throw coming from the catcher.
The Blue said the ball doesn't have to hit the B/R to get called for interference. If she's out of the safety lane and the catcher has to throw over the head of the B/R, he'd ring her up for int.
Perhaps I should have known that? Shame on me.
[ Modified 10/20/2009 1:57pm by fuddrules ]
|
| |
|
| |
Nickname:
comp
Posts: 34
Member Since: 3/29/02
Posted: 10/20/2009 9:35pm
Views: 399
Replies: 1
|
|
Re: Learned something new?
|
The rule says nothing about it being an automatic interference call. It says if the runner is out of the lane and in the umpires judgement interferes with the fielder taking the throw at 1st. Also, if the throw is coming from foul territory and the fielder is on colored portion of bag, runner is not required to be in the running lane and if hit by ball is not out.
|
| |
|
| |
Nickname:
IRISHMAFIA
Posts: 4266
Member Since: 1/09/01
Posted: 10/21/2009 4:51am
Views: 398
Replies: 1
|
|
Re: Learned something new?
|
Also, if the throw is coming from foul territory and the fielder is on colored portion of bag, runner is not required to be in the running lane and if hit by ball is not out.
Thought is correct, but needs a little fine tuning. If the throw is coming from the foul side of the 1B line, the runner is allowed an additional 3' to the inside of the line.
|
| |
|
| |
Nickname:
BretMan
Posts: 2881
Member Since: 3/14/02
Posted: 10/21/2009 9:42am
Views: 380
Replies: 1
|
|
Re: Learned something new?
|
The only baseball or softball organization I'm aware of that has issued a ruling to this effect (interference without contact on the throw, but because the batter-runner being out of the lane caused the catcher to alter her throw) is high school softball played under NFHS rules.
They are the "odd man out" in that respect. Every other sanctioning body requires a "quality throw" by the catcher- one with an actual chance to retire the B/R- and being contacted by that throw or impeding the fielder receiving it.
If this was a game played under NFHS rules, there would be some basis for that ruling. However, it's not automatic. It is up to the umpire's discretion whether or not the throw was bad because of the B/R's position out of the running lane or if it was just a bad throw, period.
For all others, I've got nothing on this play.
|
| |
|
| |
Nickname:
HugoTafurst
Posts: 4554
Member Since: 4/23/00
Posted: 10/21/2009 11:28am
Views: 371
Replies: 1
|
|
Re: Learned something new?
|
The only baseball or softball organization I'm aware of that has issued a ruling to this effect (interference without contact on the throw, but because the batter-runner being out of the lane caused the catcher to alter her throw) is high school softball played under NFHS rules.
Bret, can you tell me where you get that?
Ther NFHS rule states:
She runs outside the three-foot (0.91m) lane and, in the judgment of the umpire, interferes with the fielder taking the throw at first base (there must be a throw); ....
The NCAA rule states:
12.2.4.2 The batter-runner may not run outside the runner’s lane and, in the
umpire’s judgment, interfere with the fielder taking the throw at first base.
Exception: The batter-runner may run outside the runner’s lane to avoid
a fielder attempting to field a batted ball and/or to touch the base on the
last stride.
I looked in the NFHS case book, but did not find a referenece.
I think we all agree that "just a bad throw" does not get a violation call, but as far as I can tell NFHS still would require a "quality throw" ( a chance to retire the runner)
|
| |
|
| |
Nickname:
BretMan
Posts: 2881
Member Since: 3/14/02
Posted: 10/21/2009 12:41pm
Views: 365
Replies: 1
|
|
Re: Learned something new?
|
Well, Hugo, apparently where I got that was in some dark recess of my brain that mixes up FED baseball and softball rules.
I was so sure that this was an approved FED ruling for softball that I didn't even bother looking it up. Thanks for making me look it up!
The ruling I mentioned is actually a FED baseball interpretation. It's a goofy ruling that goes against the grain for all the other baseball and softball associations out there, but that isn't so unusual for FED baseball.
As far as I could find, you are right. This ruling has not been adopted for FED softball.
So...never mind!
|
| |
|
| |
Nickname:
HugoTafurst
Posts: 4554
Member Since: 4/23/00
Posted: 10/22/2009 6:56am
Views: 334
Replies: 0
|
|
;-) (NM)
|
|
|
ASA rule changes
< < Previous Topic
|
Next Topic > > ASA RULES
|
Report Abuse
