Jump to content
VolUmp

Protection of Fielder(s) (on batted ball).

Recommended Posts

FED Game.  0 outs.  R1 and R2.

Batter pops a trouble ball into very shallow RF.  R1 collides with F3 in his first step toward 2B.

Between F3, F4, and F9, no one had a legit chance at it, although if I had to pick one, I’d pick F4 as having the best shot at it.

I’m PU. We called nothing (other than everyone’s safe) on the play. 

No IFF (lack of ordinary effort), 

No Runner INT on R1 (Judged F3 had no chance).

No OBS on F3 (I think I should have).

Ball dropped. Everybody moved up.

I have three questions:

1) From my description, did I miss an OBS call?

2) Supposing the pop up was easily catchable by BOTH F3 and F4, may I protect both fielders in FED and call INT?

3) Supposing the pop up was easily catchable by BOTH F3 and F4, may I protect both fielders in OBR?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Register or Sign In to remove these ads
47 minutes ago, VolUmp said:

1) From my description, did I miss an OBS call?

2) Supposing the pop up was easily catchable by BOTH F3 and F4, may I protect both fielders in FED and call INT?

3) Supposing the pop up was easily catchable by BOTH F3 and F4, may I protect both fielders in OBR?

  1. Yes, assuming the collision you describe hindered the runner. The key concept is hindrance, not contact. Benefit of any doubt to the runner.
  2. No. The reference (maybe oddly) is in the INT rule, 8-4-2g, which refers to "...a fielder on his initial attempt to field a batted ball." That's the protection a fielder gets from OBS: the runner is responsible for avoiding contact. FED interprets the provision narrowly, just as OBR does.
  3. No. The definition is ambiguous (might cover more than 1 fielder), but the INT rule is quite clear: "He fails to avoid a fielder who is attempting to field a batted ball, or intentionally interferes with a thrown ball, provided that if two or more fielders attempt to field a batted ball, and the runner comes in contact with one or more of them, the umpire shall determine which fielder is entitled to the benefit of this rule, and shall not declare the runner out for coming in contact with a fielder other than the one the umpire determines to be entitled to field such a ball." 6.01(a)(10).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1)  Yes.  A collision a batted ball is almost always INT or OBS -- and since this wasn't INT ...

2,3)  Only one can be protected.  It's right in (one of) the books (something like "If two or more players are attemtping to field the ball, the umpire shall determine who is the fielder most likely to field the ball and shall protect only that fielder.")

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, maven said:

No. The definition is ambiguous (might cover more than 1 fielder), but the INT rule is quite clear: "He fails to avoid a fielder who is attempting to field a batted ball, or intentionally interferes with a thrown ball, provided that if two or more fielders attempt to field a batted ball, and the runner comes in contact with one or more of them, the umpire shall determine which fielder is entitled to the benefit of this rule, and shall not declare the runner out for coming in contact with a fielder other than the one the umpire determines to be entitled to field such a ball." 6.01(a)(10).

 

3 hours ago, noumpere said:

Only one can be protected.  It's right in (one of) the books (something like "If two or more players are attemtping to field the ball, the umpire shall determine who is the fielder most likely to field the ball and shall protect only that fielder.")

Both appreciated.

R1 was most definitely hindered, and maybe I initially saw it as incidental contact, but he made it easily to 2B.  I wish, if for no other reason than to shore up my confidence, I’d called OBS as it was moot in the end.

My reason for asking #2 was the lack of clarification I find in the FED books. 

(Agreed that it’s all spelled out in OBR).

NOW ... I don’t call college, but I only go to college camps, and my most recent and well-known instructor “corrected” me on this question and said, “You may indeed protect more than one fielder.”   (Sigh …)

Is the rule any different in college ball, or is he just mistaken?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, VolUmp said:

NOW ... I don’t call college, but I only go to college camps, and my most recent and well-known instructor “corrected” me on this question and said, “You may indeed protect more than one fielder.”   (Sigh …)

It's possible he meant that protection can change during play. This can happen in a couple ways, as when one fielder calls off another, or when a ball is misplayed and another fielder then has a play on it. So we can in a sense protect more than one fielder.

What we cannot do, at least for FED and OBR, is protect more than one fielder at a time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, maven said:

It's possible he meant that protection can change during play. This can happen in a couple ways, as when one fielder calls off another, or when a ball is misplayed and another fielder then has a play on it. So we can in a sense protect more than one fielder.

What we cannot do, at least for FED and OBR, is protect more than one fielder at a time.

I'd explained my question to him precisely as I did on this post ... as multiple players being protected at the same time.

I do comprehend the idea that the protection can change.  It actually happened to me once in a JV game several years ago.  2 outs and R2.  Pop up almost directly over the head of F5.  F6 was moving toward it and calling for it (calling off F5).  R2 ran into F6, I had INT, but F5 caught the ball — essentially making my call moot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, VolUmp said:

I'd explained my question to him precisely as I did on this post ... as multiple players being protected at the same time.

I do comprehend the idea that the protection can change.  It actually happened to me once in a JV game several years ago.  2 outs and R2.  Pop up almost directly over the head of F5.  F6 was moving toward it and calling for it (calling off F5).  R2 ran into F6, I had INT, but F5 caught the ball — essentially making my call moot.

I would simply say that the act of one fielder calling off another is not in itself reason to change that protection.

In your scenario...until/unless F5 peels off and truly surrenders the play to F6 I would stick with protecting F5.

Your OP presents, to me at least, an interesting what if scenario...that is, at the time of the collision you rule that F3 had no chance to make a play and that your protection was for F4.  But what if, after the collision of R1 and F3, the wind blew the ball towards the right side foul line, rendering F4 incapable of making the play...but falling in a area where, F3 would hypothetically have had a chance, if he hadn't collided with R1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

But what if, after the collision of R1 and F3, the wind blew the ball towards the right side foul line, rendering F4 incapable of making the play...but falling in a area where, F3 would hypothetically have had a chance, if he hadn't collided with R1.

Then I made the best call with the information I had at that moment of decision?????

I’ll live with that. It happens every time I call a balk and the base coach has no idea why I’m advancing his “non-deceived” runner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The college rule isn’t any different than the FED or OBR. Here’s the relevant NCAA rule:

NCAA rule 8-5-d. The runner interferes intentionally with a throw or thrown ball, or interferes with a fielder who is attempting to field a batted ball. If a double play is likely, and the runner intentionally interferes with the fielder who is attempting to field or throw the ball, both runner and batter-runner shall be declared out;

Note 1 If two fielders attempt to field a batted ball, the umpire shall determine which fielder is more likely to make the play and only that fielder is protected from interference by the runner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Senor Azul said:

Note 1 If two fielders attempt to field a batted ball, the umpire shall determine which fielder is more likely to make the play and only that fielder is protected from interference by the runner.

That's weird. It's not protection from INT, it's protection from OBS. Ordinarily, contact between fielder and runner will be OBS, except when a fielder is protected.

He can still be interfered with, even when fielding a batted ball.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, maven said:

That's weird. It's not protection from INT, it's protection from OBS. Ordinarily, contact between fielder and runner will be OBS, except when a fielder is protected.

He can still be interfered with, even when fielding a batted ball.

Methinks you're overthinking this because of your unusually astute IQ and Vocabulary.  I read it and understood exactly what it meant, which happens often in the OBR book especially, and much of College and FED verbiage is taken directly from OBR. 

Why is the man at bat ALWAYS a batter until he gets hit ... when he suddenly becomes a hit batsman??  Cricket??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×