|
|
Here are the plays of the week:
Week #7 (4/25/10):
Q: R1 is on second base with one out. B3 hits the ball back up the middle and the ball is deflected by the pitcher toward F6.
R1 is advancing on the hit and is hit by the ball as she heads to third base. F6 is in position to field the ball. What's your call?
A: Since the ball was deflected by the pitcher before it hits R1, R1 is NOT out as long as she does not intentionally contact the ball.
The key word would be "intentional." As long as there is no intentional act by that runner to interfere, the ball is live and play should continue. 8-8-6; 8-4-1
Week #6 (4/18/10):
Q: Bottom of the seventh, runners on first and second, two outs. The home team is losing two to one. The batter bunts a ball down the first baseline.
It's a perfect bunt. The catcher is chasing it down, but realizes she won't be able to get the runner out. The ball rolls into foul territory, and continues
to roll right next to the line, threatening to come back into fair territory. The catcher, realizing it might roll back fair, leaps at the ball and knocks it
further foul with her catcher's mask. What's your call?
A: Since the catcher's mask is still in her possession and she just touches the mask to the ball, we have a foul ball per 5-1-1d(1).
No different than her touching it with her mitt, her hand or any other part of her body.
Because this was a bunt, we could have an out if the bunt results in the third strike.
Week #5 (4/11/10):
Q: Bases loaded (R1 on 3rd, R2 on 2nd and R3 on 1st) with 1 out. B5 hits a fly ball into short right field that appears to drop in for a base hit,
despite 3 fielders converging to try to make the catch. R1 crosses home plate and all the other runners hold close to their bases.
Now for some reason, R1 decides to go back to third. Her bench or her base coach may have yelled that the ball had been caught
or she just got confused and thought that the ball may have been caught after all. None of the umpires signaled an out.
The ball actually hit the ground without being caught. The defense throws the ball to the catcher who touches home plate. What's your call?
A: Continued discussion on the play found that there are conflicting rules in our book on whether the run scores or if the runner is out.
The NFHS was asked for a ruling and after much discussion back there, here is the official ruling for today.
It's for today because this play and the rules involved are going to be discussed by the Rules Committee this June.
They are probably going to adjust rule 2-24-4 to exclude legally touching home. Rule 2-49 is the basis for their ruling.
Here's the official ruling on the play from NFHS:
R1’s advancement to home was legal and thus, 2-49 applies. The run scores and we have bases loaded with one out. If the umpire deems that R1’s
act of retreating after touching home intentionally interferes with a defensive player’s opportunity to make a play on another runner, the runner
closest to home would be declared out (see 8-6-18), but R1’s run would still count.
Week #4 (4/4/10):
Q: B1, a left-handed slap hitter runs forward out of the batter's box and is struck by F1's pitch. What's your call?
A:
We have a slap-hitter that has run forward out of the box and while out there, is hit by the pitch.
She did not make contact with the pitch, therefore, we do not have her out for contacting the ball outside the batter's box.
Her action did prevent the ball from entering the strike zone. The rule, 7-2-1h does state that it is a strike if,
in the umpire's judgment, she prevented the ball from entering the strike zone. With her being out of the batter's box,
she is at least four feet in front of the plate and probably more. That is plenty of room for a pitched ball to move into the strike zone.
Don' forget, it was her actions caused the dilemma. NFHS rules that we have a dead ball and the batter is charged with a strike.
Week #3 (3/28/10):
Q: There are no outs and
no runners on base. The batter bunts the ball and it goes up. There
is a spin on the ball. The batter drops the bat and the bat lies
across the 3rd base line. The bat stops moving. As the
batter-runner starts for first base, the ball comes down and
contacts the bat directly above the base line. The ball again
bounces in the air and is caught in flight in foul territory by the
catcher. What's your call?
A:
The
bat is part of the playing field at this time and once the ball
touches the bat, it would be the same as the ball touching the
ground (2-9-5e) and the ball remains live. The ball then bounced
off the bat into foul territory where it was first touched and
it is not considered a catch (7-4-13). We have a foul ball. Interestingly, of all the answers received, only one person
questioned the count. The count was purposefully omitted, however,
it was a bunt and if the batter had two strikes on her, we would
then have an attempted bunt that was foul for the third strike
and an out.
Week #2 (3/21/10):
Q: B1 has a 3-1 count, no
outs, no one on base. On the next pitch, B1 swings and misses. The
pitched ball is in the dirt. B1 takes off and runs to first, either
because (a) she thinks it's a dropped third strike; or (b)
intentionally, in order to draw a throw to first base by the
catcher. The catcher, reacting to the running of the batter, throws
the ball to first base. The offensive coach calls time and comes on
to the field and states that because it is now 3-2, there is no play
on the batter going to first base, thus the act of the catcher
throwing the ball to first base when the base is unoccupied warrants
a "ball" called and the count should now be four (4) balls and the
batter should be awarded first base for a base on balls. What's your
call?
A:
First,
let's start with intent. It is not possible to prove intent on this
play. If the offense stated it was their intent to run when they had
no right to, in order to draw the throw, the umpire would have to
eject the runner for unsporting behavior. The offense will always
say the runner thought it was strike three. So, forget intent.
Next, let's review what we would do if the runner did not run and
the catcher, thinking it was strike three, threw to the first
baseman. We would say, "It is incumbent on the catcher to know the
situation," and therefore we would award ball four and send the
batter to first. However, that's not the case here. The runner did
run. She ran when she didn't have the right to run. While it is
incumbent on the catcher to know the situation, it is also incumbent
on the batter to know the situation. Both players did something
wrong. It would be inherently wrong of us, to reward the one and
penalize the other.
Federation, more than any other organization, clearly states the
intent and purpose of the rules. In the statement that precedes Rule
1, Federation makes it crystal clear that the purpose of the rules
is to create a balance of play and an equal opportunity between the
offense and the defense. Federation stresses knowledge of the intent
of the rule so that it may be intelligently applied. Federation
stresses a player or team should not be permitted an advantage which
was not intended by a rule, nor should a player or team be placed at
a disadvantage not intended by a rule.
The intent of the throw back rule is to stop the catcher from
throwing the ball all over the diamond after each pitch thereby
delaying the play of the game. The intent of the rule was not
violated in the action of Play #2. It would be wrong to award the
offense something they did not earn or have a right to due to their
runner running when she didn't have the right to run.
The correct action by the umpire would be to rule a dead ball, and
return the batter to bat with a 3 ball, 2 strike count. If you need
a rule reference, use Rule 10-2-3g.
Week #1(3/14/10):
Q: In the first inning, #1 was
entered as the courtesy runner for the pitcher, #5. In the fourth
inning #1 again ran as the courtesy runner for the pitcher. In the
seventh inning, #1 entered as a substitute for the right-fielder, #9
and later scored. The opposing coach said that #1 is a illegal
substitute, because she entered the game for the third time. After
checking the line-up card, it turned out that #5 was the third
baseman. What's your call?
A: First off, it is
imperative that the plate umpire verify that the courtesy runner is
actually replacing either the pitcher or the catcher. While this is
a grievous error by the plate umpire and the substituting coach, it
nevertheless, qualifies as a substitution. Regardless of whether you
deem this a violation of the courtesy runner rule or a second
reentry into the game, it will constitute an illegal substitution by
the substituting team. Assuming that no pitch has been thrown
following this information from the opposing coach, the run scored
by #1 is nullified. #1 is called out and is restricted to the dugout
because they were an illegal substitute. All other outs made during
the play stand. If there are runners that were not put out, they are
returned to the base they occupied at the time of the pitch. If this
information was presented after a pitch was thrown to the next
batter, the play would stand as called. However, #1 would be
restricted to the dugout and #9 would be replaced back in the lineup
with no substitution charged (#9 is deemed not to have left the
game).
|
