runner hit by ball
#1
Posted 30 July 2012 - 01:18 AM
runners on first and third. I was in the B position. The batter hits a very slow roller
down the third base line. The ball goes into foul territory and passes the third baseman.
The runner from third is behind the fielder closer to third base. Once the ball is past the
third baseman it takes a strange bounce and hits the runner who had moved into fair
territory to avoid being hit by the foul ball. My partner called the runner from third out
and a dead ball. He came to me for help and I told him if the runner was in foul territory
it would be a foul ball and if he was in fair territory he would be out. However, something
that i did not think about was that the ball had passed the fielder and hit the runner who
was standing right behind him. Now that I think about it maybe the ball should have been
left in play because the third baseman had a chance to field the ball and did not.
An opinions.
Lefty
#5
Posted 30 July 2012 - 11:05 AM
I hear that alot
Trout is correct.
You are correct in your answer but I think you cheated!
I used to be a really good Baseball Player until my eyes started going bad. So I became an Umpire!
2013 Game Count:
Travel Ball: 63
High School: 50
Canceled HS Games: 5
River City Umpires Association - Webmaster
First Coast Umpires Association - Webmaster
Umps 4 Hire - Webmaster
FHSAA Baseball Umpire
Babe Ruth Baseball and Softball Certified
#8
Posted 30 July 2012 - 04:17 PM
The exemption is for a runner "immediately behind" the fielder. Reason: no time to avoid.
5.09(f ) 7.09(k )
I coach. I have to consider the situation from both sides - offense and defense.
#12
Posted 30 July 2012 - 06:08 PM
The real question, how do you rule if your partner calls it dead and comes to you, like in the OP? You know that it shouldn't be an out but now he's killed the play.
Not a perfect solution but, if your partner does decide to oveturn his initial 'Out' call based upon your additional information, I would think you would return all runners to their TOP bases and put the BR back in the box w/the previous count.
I know there are no 'do-overs' in baseball, but in this case (where the problem was caused by an umpire's lack of rules knowledge) I think this is probably the way to go.
Oh - and your partner's gonna need a cold one to wash down that sh!t sandwich the DM just handed him.
CCSUA
#13
Posted 30 July 2012 - 08:07 PM
Lefty - did your partner come to you on his own or was this after speaking to one of the (probably offensive) managers? From your OP, I am guessing you left it as an out...did anyone argue?
#14
Posted 30 July 2012 - 10:49 PM
Not a perfect solution but, if your partner does decide to oveturn his initial 'Out' call based upon your additional information, I would think you would return all runners to their TOP bases and put the BR back in the box w/the previous count.
I know there are no 'do-overs' in baseball, but in this case (where the problem was caused by an umpire's lack of rules knowledge) I think this is probably the way to go.
No. You can NEVER have a do-over in eating a call.
#15
Posted 31 July 2012 - 06:33 AM
Fixing it...Assuming when R3 was hit no other fielder had a play on the ball, I think I would be more inclined to treat it like a batted ball hitting an umpire before it passed an infielder. Leave R3 at third, advance R1 to second and BR to first. Batter did in fact hit a fair ball, past F5, that was incorrectly killed by PU.
I think I agree. BR awarded a single, runners advance if forced
2013 Rainouts: 34
2013 Ejections: 2 (Both MC)
#17
Posted 01 August 2012 - 01:54 AM
the fielder, In fact he was so close I did not see the ball hit him. When
my partner came over to see me after he called the runner out. He told me
the ball had hit the runner, He wanted my opinion on the play. I seem to
remember yelling from both managers. One wanted an out and the
other a foul ball I think.
Lefty
#18
Posted 03 August 2012 - 01:10 PM
I have never heard of a distance exception. It is that way because the fielder has made their attempt so there is no play to interfere with. If ability to avoid was a consideration then the second fielder having a shot wouldn't be there. Simply if the runner deeper than the fielder and behind him, not twenty feet away, and another fielder doesn't have a play then it is a live ball. Same rule cites as Rich.How close behind the fielder was the runner? 5 feet - play the bounce. 20 feet - that's an out.
The exemption is for a runner "immediately behind" the fielder. Reason: no time to avoid.
5.09(f ) 7.09(k )
#19
Posted 03 August 2012 - 02:05 PM
I have never heard of a distance exception. It is that way because the fielder has made their attempt so there is no play to interfere with. If ability to avoid was a consideration then the second fielder having a shot wouldn't be there. Simply if the runner deeper than the fielder and behind him, not twenty feet away, and another fielder doesn't have a play then it is a live ball. Same rule cites as Rich.
How close behind the fielder was the runner? 5 feet - play the bounce. 20 feet - that's an out.
The exemption is for a runner "immediately behind" the fielder. Reason: no time to avoid.
5.09(f ) 7.09(k )
Explain "immediatly back". It's in both rules.
20' may not be the real distance but the basic concept is that if the runner should have a reasonable expectation that a fielder may make a play then he's exempt. Once the ball is some distance past the fielder he no longer has that excuse as he now has time to avoid the ball.
I coach. I have to consider the situation from both sides - offense and defense.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users












