2015 NCAA Baseball Rules Interpretations

[Majordave]

Received a document last night from one of my summer assigners/defacto leader of our local KC Collegiate Umpires Association. Not sure of the origin.  But I thought it was worth sharing.

 

 

2015 Interpretations February 3, 2015

 

1. May artificial noise makers be used in NCAA competition?

 

There is no provision prohibiting the use of these noise makers during the regular season. To prohibit these devices would be a conference decision. Artificial noisemakers are prohibited in post-season play.

 

2. 1-2b—foul poles: advertising may be placed on a foul pole.

 

The advertising should be on the inside (fair side) of the foul pole and shall not be confusing for the umpire to render a decision on whether a batted ball is fair or foul.

 

3. 1-12—is the use of Baum bats in a contest legal?

 

Yes, as long as the Baum bat is within the guidelines listed in Rule 1-12 for wood bats.

 

4. 1-14c & i, (1), (3), (4)—the placement of a conference or school’s logo on the uniform shall be same size and shape that is recommended in Rule 1-14i.

It shall not be in the shape of a baseball nor white or gray in color. It shall not be distracting to the hitter or be positioned in such a place that would be difficult for the hitter to pick up the release and thus be confusing to the hitter. c. if a pitcher wears a helmet, it must have a nonglossy finish. 

 

5. 2-26, A.R. 5—the length of a suspension for a pitcher is determined by the defensive position the player was listed at the time of his ejection. When ejected while listed as the pitcher or after having been removed as the pitcher and subsequently ejected, the player is governed by the four-game suspension penalty. If, after having been replaced as the pitcher and is moved to another defensive position and is subsequently ejected, his suspension is for only one game.

 

6. 5-2f, Electronic Equipment—Information gathered using electronic equipment may not be transmitted from the stands or areas behind home plate to the dugout.

 

7. 5-15a, (1,2,3)—when the head coach is ejected as a result of a routine argument that led to the ejection, there is no suspension. If the ejection is for one of the unsportsmanlike acts as listed in Rule -5-15a, 1), 2), 3), a one game suspension is appropriate. For A.R. 4) and 5) and b. the suspension is for two games.

 

8. 6-1d, (a)—a defensive player may catch a foul popup in the field of play and then step into a dead ball area. Without losing body control, the player may throw from a dead ball area if ground rules allow. Otherwise the player must reestablish himself in live ball territory before he can throw. In the player’s attempt to throw from DBT, he drops the ball. Award two bases as a “thrown†ball went out of play. Example: R1 and R2, batter pops up in foul territory. After a legal catch, thefielder enters DBT and prepares to throw (allowed by pregame ground rule discussions) and as he pulls his arm back, drops the ball while still in DBT.

 

9. 7-11f, Exception 4—replace the words “alters the play†with this wording, “intentionally interferes with the play.†Rationale: In the body of the rule, reference is made to “intentionally or unintentionally interferes with the catcher’s fielding or throwing . . .†this makes the wording consistent in the body of the rule with the wording in the Exception.

 

10. 7-11p, A.R. 1, A.R. 2—the rule was revised to include the statement “interferes with a fielder taking the throw.†This insertion in the rule was made to ensure that a fielder was in position to receive the throw. This eliminates running lane interference being called when the defense did not have any player in the vicinity of the base.

 

11. 8-5a—a base runner assumes his lead off a base by going backwards toward the outfield grass. Is this base runner out of the base line? No, the runner establishes his own base line. Once established and when a play is being made on him, he is governed by the rule that he cannot move more than three feet on either side of this direct line between the two bases or be guilty of running outside the base line and should be called out. This “skunk in the outfield†play is legal until he violates the three-foot restrictions.

 

12. 8-2g—speaks to a batted ball deflected by another fielder or by the pitcher; the concept of a runner being out when he is hit by a deflected ball does not apply even though another fielder has a chance to make a play on a ball. After a ball has been touched (deflected) by any infielder (including the pitcher), if the ball strikes a runner (unintentionally on the part of the runner) the ball is alive and in play even if another infielder may be in position to field the ball. Being in a position to field a ball is different than making a play on the ball. If a fielder is making a play on The ball and the runner interferes with the fielder, (even though the ball was deflected) the runner must avoid the fielder or he will be called out. A fielder making a play on a batted ball takes priority. The reasoning is that a runner cannot be expected to avoid a deflected ball while running andThe reasoning is that a runner cannot be expected to avoid a deflected ball while running and should not; therefore, be called out for being struck by the deflection. A runner may still be guilty of interference, if he deliberately deflects the ball or he allows it to strike him when he could have reasonably avoided it.

 

13. 8-6b (9) A.R.; 8-5j, EX—is the order in which appeals are taken important?

 

Yes, with only one out and where one of the appeals is at first base, the order is important if a runner is scoring. If a base running error occurs before a following runner is put out, the force will remain in effect.

 

PLAY: Bases loaded, one out, the batter hits what appears to be a double but is thrown out at second (two outs). On appeal, R2 is called out for missing third. The error at third occurred before the out at second so the force remained in effect. Runs do not count, OBR Wendelstedt, Interpretation. When there are two outs, and the defense appeals two runners, they get to choose the most advantageous out. Order does not matter. (8-6b, (9), A.R.

 

14. 9-1a—May a LHP lift his stride leg straight up without breaking the plane of the back edge of the pitcher’s plate and turn inside and throw to second base in an attempt to retire a runner from first base who is stealing on the movement?

 

A pitcher may throw to an unoccupied base in an attempt to retire an advancing runner. As long as the motion is one continuous motion, it is legal. If the pitcher stops at the top (where his lower leg and thigh make a 90-degree angle) before he turns inside, a balk shall be called. The stopping and restarting constitute two moves and not one continuous motion. A balk would also be called if the runner from first bluffs and goes back to first and the pitcher follows thru with the throw to second.

 

15. 9-2e (Add an Approved Ruling) A.R. 1—a pitcher may use the rosin bag to apply rosin to his bare hand or hands. The ball may not be dusted with the rosin bag. Neither shall the pitcher or any player apply rosin from the rosin bag to his glove or to any part of their uniforms. Should this happen and, in the judgment of the umpire, the pitcher did not intend to alter the characteristics of a pitch, he may warn the pitcher. Should the pitcher continue violating the rule the umpire should then eject the pitcher. A pitcher shall not place the rosin bag into his glove with intent to deceive a runner.  Should the pitcher continue violating the rule the umpire should then eject the pitcher. A pitcher shall not place the rosin bag into his glove with intent to deceive a runner. Should the pitcher do so, the umpire will call a balk.

 

16. 9-3b—even though the rule reads, “must step ‘directly’ with a runner on third†can the pitcher stride at a 45-degree angle toward the third base foul line and throw or fake a throw to third?

 

Yes, “directly†is interpreted the same as it is for a left-handed pitcher on his step to pick-off a runner at first base.

[JaxRolo]

You really want me to read all that???

[Majordave]

Since you don't work college baseball (yet) you can have a pass on reading this list Chief!  How's that?  

[noumpere]

Interesting -- especially the "rosin bag balk" interp, and the fact that a baum bat is listed as a "wood" bat.

[Majordave]

Baum is wood sawdust and glue/resin I thought.

[noumpere]

From the Baum website:  BBCOR Certified -Approved for H.S. and Collegiate Play, -3 Length to Weight Ratio, Ash Wood Exterior Shell, Barrel Size of 2.505", Composite Reinforcement Surrounding Core Foamed Plastic Core, NCAA, NFHS Approved

 

I also wonder how the NCAA would treat Bamboo bats, if it ever came up.

[Jimurray]

13 clears up nothing.

[MidAmUmp]

13 clears up nothing.

What is confusing or not clear about #13? Not asking to be a smart ass. Just wondering.

[Majordave]

I was thinking the same thing Jason.  What do you mean Jim?

 

The points made in the interpretations are not stand alone, per se.  They are supplemental to the actual rules.  If taken as a whole; the rule and A.R.(s) and the interpretation #13 then it seems pretty clear to me.  That doesn't mean I couldn't screw it up in the heat of battle.  But I certainly hope not. 

[Jimurray]

I was thinking the same thing Jason.  What do you mean Jim?

 

The points made in the interpretations are not stand alone, per se.  They are supplemental to the actual rules.  If taken as a whole; the rule and A.R.(s) and the interpretation #13 then it seems pretty clear to me.  That doesn't mean I couldn't screw it up in the heat of battle.  But I certainly hope not. 

The play in 13 is pretty clear in that 8-5j EX does apply and I wouldn't think there would be any confusion. But "the order of appeals" can refer to two things. One would be two forces or a force and 1B out appeal in relaxed action where NCAA requires the lead runner to be appealed first or the force is removed. The reference to Wendelstedt is confusing because as of my 2012 WUM, Wendelstedt would say that if the force existed at the time of the miss it would be a force when appealed no matter what the order. Unless he has changed and TUS is teaching something different now.

The "order of appeals" can also refer to a non forced and forced/1B out where if the order is wrong the third out would not be for missing 1B or a forced base. That "order" matters in every code.

[MidAmUmp]

I don't have my rule book or test with me, but I think the only time the order of appeal doesn't matter is if there are 2 outs to start with and there are 2 appeals which would lead to an advantageous 4th out. Any other time they must appeal in the proper order.

 

Example:

2 outs, bases loaded, B hits a triple, R1 misses 3rd, B/R misses 1st. Defense first appeals R1 missing 3rd, then appeals B/R missing 1st. I believe no runs would score because of an advantageous 4th out.

 

I know I had a question on the test and if I hadn't re-read it closely I would miss it (haven't submitted it yet, so I still might...) it had to do with 1 out instead of 2 outs and the number of outs made all the difference. I can't remember the exact situation now.

 

I could be talking out of my ass though since I don't have anything to reference in front of me at the moment.

[Haid D' Salaami]

I knew the Rosin bag, now becoming a balk was coming. It is now the same as OBR.

[noumpere]

I agree with Mid-Am's play and ruling above.

 

It's clear to me when there's two (or more) appeals after play has ended, or one "normal" out during play and then an appeal.

 

It's unclear to me what happens if there's a live action appeal followed by an appeal after play has ended:

 

One out.  R1, R3.  Batter singles.  R3 scores, R1 misses second, BR misses first.

(a) After the ball is returned to the infield and the runners have stopped, defense appeals BR and then R1.  Ruling: Run scores -- appeals out of order

 

(b) BR is thrown out trying for second, and then the defense appeals R1.  Ruling:  No run scores.  BR's out during live action did not remove the force on R1

 

© As BR tries for second and R1 tries for home, the ball is thrown to F3 who steps on first saying, "BR missed first".  F3 then throws home but fails to retire R1.  Defense now appeals R1 at second.  Ruling:  Does the "must appeal in the right order" rule or the "outs during live action don't remove a force" rule apply?  (Sorry, no books handy for references)

[noumpere]

I knew the Rosin bag, now becoming a balk was coming. It is now the same as OBR.

So, if you have that question on the test -- has the answer now changed? 

[Jimurray]

I agree with Mid-Am's play and ruling above.

 

It's clear to me when there's two (or more) appeals after play has ended, or one "normal" out during play and then an appeal.

 

It's unclear to me what happens if there's a live action appeal followed by an appeal after play has ended:

 

One out.  R1, R3.  Batter singles.  R3 scores, R1 misses second, BR misses first.

(a) After the ball is returned to the infield and the runners have stopped, defense appeals BR and then R1.  Ruling: Run scores -- appeals out of order

 

(b) BR is thrown out trying for second, and then the defense appeals R1.  Ruling:  No run scores.  BR's out during live action did not remove the force on R1

 

© As BR tries for second and R1 tries for home, the ball is thrown to F3 who steps on first saying, "BR missed first".  F3 then throws home but fails to retire R1.  Defense now appeals R1 at second.  Ruling:  Does the "must appeal in the right order" rule or the "outs during live action don't remove a force" rule apply?  (Sorry, no books handy for references)

Notice the inconsistency which is generated by requiring the correct order of forced bases.

 

That would not exist if they used Wendelstedt's interp. (if it is still their interp and TUS agrees with them).

 

2012 WUM:

 

"P353:

Bases loaded. one out, no count. The batter hits a double into right-center field, scoring all three runners. R1 misses second base, and R2 misses third base, on their way past them. The defense tags second base appealing that R1 missed it, and then tags third base appealing that R2 missed third base. Both runners are called out.

 

Ruling:

Both outs are force outs because at the time of the missed bases, both runners were forced to touch them. R1's out at second base, upon appeal, does not remove the force requirement of R2 to touch third base. The third out is a force out and no runs score."

[johnnyg08]

I don't have my rule book or test with me, but I think the only time the order of appeal doesn't matter is if there are 2 outs to start with and there are 2 appeals which would lead to an advantageous 4th out. Any other time they must appeal in the proper order.

 

Example:

2 outs, bases loaded, B hits a triple, R1 misses 3rd, B/R misses 1st. Defense first appeals R1 missing 3rd, then appeals B/R missing 1st. I believe no runs would score because of an advantageous 4th out.

 

I know I had a question on the test and if I hadn't re-read it closely I would miss it (haven't submitted it yet, so I still might...) it had to do with 1 out instead of 2 outs and the number of outs made all the difference. I can't remember the exact situation now.

 

I could be talking out of my ass though since I don't have anything to reference in front of me at the moment.

 

I tried to bring that up in my study group that Wendelstedt's interpretation doesn't require appeals to be made in a  specific order if at the time of the pitch, a force out was possible, then it remains a force upon appeal.  

 

Maybe that's the question I got wrong!!  

 

I ran it by a guy who earned 100% on his NCAA test and he stated that under NCAA order does matter.

[umpstu]

You really want me to read all that???

And not a single picture.

[Majordave]

High School is where the cartoon section is with all those mechanigrams drawings.  Try there.  Hahahahahaha!

[Jimurray]

I don't have my rule book or test with me, but I think the only time the order of appeal doesn't matter is if there are 2 outs to start with and there are 2 appeals which would lead to an advantageous 4th out. Any other time they must appeal in the proper order.

 

Example:

2 outs, bases loaded, B hits a triple, R1 misses 3rd, B/R misses 1st. Defense first appeals R1 missing 3rd, then appeals B/R missing 1st. I believe no runs would score because of an advantageous 4th out.

 

I know I had a question on the test and if I hadn't re-read it closely I would miss it (haven't submitted it yet, so I still might...) it had to do with 1 out instead of 2 outs and the number of outs made all the difference. I can't remember the exact situation now.

 

I could be talking out of my ass though since I don't have anything to reference in front of me at the moment.

 

I tried to bring that up in my study group that Wendelstedt's interpretation doesn't require appeals to be made in a  specific order if at the time of the pitch, a force out was possible, then it remains a force upon appeal.  

 

Maybe that's the question I got wrong!!  

 

I ran it by a guy who earned 100% on his NCAA test and he stated that under NCAA order does matter.

There is no question that the current NCAA regime wants the order of missed force base appeals be done where the trail runner is appealed before the lead runner is appealed unless it happens during live action. (the live action exemption is pending some confirmation if it was an appeal during live action). The NCAA rulebook supports their position but if parsed could be used to be neutral.

The order of appeals will always matter if you have one out and a missed no forced base and a forced/1B miss is appealed.

The order of missed forced base appeals matters currently in NCAA. If it happens to me in any code I'm using the Wendelstedt interp. if you want to go there, there are numerous sticky wickets with the current NCAA rules. The odds of two Forced base appeals happening are low so this discussion is best suited for a bunch of umpires at a barbeque drinking adult beverages. Why they made it a test question I don't know

[Haid D' Salaami]

I would follow exactly what NCAA wants and not the Wendlestedt manual... It can lead to a protest if ( i use this term loosely) the coach knows the rules.

[johnnyg08]

I would follow exactly what NCAA wants and not the Wendlestedt manual... It can lead to a protest if ( i use this term loosely) the coach knows the rules.

 

Yep...pretty easy, they want order, then enforce appeal order.  Pretty simple. 

[noumpere]

 

Why they made it a test question I don't know

 

 

I think your explanation is exactly why they made it a test question.

[Jimurray]

 

 

Why they made it a test question I don't know

 

 

I think your explanation is exactly why they made it a test question.

 

 

They need to make these sits test questions also:

 

 

 

Bases loaded, 1 out, Batter hits base hit which goes thru to the wall and is misshandled, allowing R3, R2, and R1 to score. R2 and R1 both miss 3B. F5 catches R1's miss and calls for the ball and appeals. R1 called out. The dugout spy gets the coach's attention and tells him R2 missed 3B also. After a proper appeal R2 is called out. How many runs score?

 

Bases loaded, 2 outs, Batter hits base hit which goes thru to the wall and is misshandled, allowing R3, R2, and R1 to score. R2 and R1 both miss 3B. F5 catches R1's miss and calls for the ball and appeals. R1 called out. The dugout spy gets the coach's attention and the coach tells the umpire he wants to do a fourth out appeal which he successfully does and R2 is called out. How many runs score?

[noumpere]

 

 

 

 

They need to make these sits test questions also:

 

 

I am not saying anything different -- but that issue is different from "why make this a test question.?"

[Jimurray]

 

 

 

 

 

They need to make these sits test questions also:

 

 

I am not saying anything different -- but that issue is different from "why make this a test question.?"

 

Your point is taken. The test question is for me and whoever prefers the OBR interp. Hopefully no one will ever have to rule on such a sit and it can remain an interesting rule to discuss.