Jump to content

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member
  • 0
Guest Bruce

What's The Call?

Question

Guest Bruce

Had a once in a lifetime freak play last week in a high school game.

Two outs no one on. Very windy day. High popup on the 1B line, the 1Bman is trying to get under it like 12 feet foul. The batter-runner is at 1B already, standing on the base, as the ball is coming down. The wind blows the ball back fair at the last second, and the fair ball hits the batter-runner on the foot in fair territory as he is standing on the base. The 1Bman is like 8-10 feet away in foul territory having already missed his chance to catch the ball. No other fielder was near the batter-runner with any chance to make a play.

I did not call the batter-runner out because there was nobody near him with a chance to catch the ball, and there was no play for anybody to throw him out at first because he was already at first. But I know it may have been the wrong call. The batter-runner may have to be called out no matter what.

The interpreters here in NJ agreed with my call, including the state interpreter, Craig Yetman. The NCAA rulebook states that if a fair ball hits the batter-runner in fair territory before the ball touches a fielder that the batter-runner is out, so I assume he'd be out under those rules. Not sure about the pro ruling.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 0
5 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

I revised your post with the appropriate cross out and added bolded.

Now that I assume you have actually read the post, do you still agree that it is not an out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member
  • 0
1 hour ago, beerguy55 said:

He did have a play.  He didn't necessarily have a chance to make the catch, but with the ball in front of him he still has a play on the ball.  Even with B/R standing on first, it doesn't matter - the ball hasn't passed him, he still has a play on the ball after it lands - the ball hitting the B/R as it landed interfered with that.

Go have another beer. "Making a play on the ball" means that he has a reasonable chance to get an out. It does not mean that he simply can eventually get the ball after the runners are all safe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
36 minutes ago, SavoyBG said:

Now that I assume you have actually read the post, do you still agree that it is not an out?

In FED I would think we use "string" theory and more than likely he was hit past the string and is not out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 hour ago, Jimurray said:

In FED I would think we use "string" theory and more than likely he was hit past the string and is not out. 

Read it again. He was in front of the string.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Another play that I had last year in a high school game.

Two outs, bases loaded. Base hit to the outfield, first runner scores. Second runner crosses the plate but does not touch the plate. The runner from 1B then gets thrown out at 3B to end the inning. After the out, the runner who missed the plate touches the plate on his way to the dugout. Does the run count, do they have to appeal, what?

The team did not appeal, but the NJ state interpreter claims that you don't count the run because the runner did not touch the plate before the third out. I disagree. My chapter interpreter sees it my way. The run counts unless the team appeals before all the infielders have left the field. The fact that he went back and touched the plate means nothing, as he can't do that after the third out has been recorded. I think you treat it like any other missed base. The defense has to appeal, otherwise it is assumed that he touches base and the run counts.

I found this approved ruling for MLB, and the run counts unless the defense appeals.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
3 hours ago, SavoyBG said:

Go have another beer. "Making a play on the ball" means that he has a reasonable chance to get an out. It does not mean that he simply can eventually get the ball after the runners are all safe.

 

3 hours ago, johnnyg08 said:

This is true. 

Is there documentation to support this?

Because now you start opening the door on situations with speedy runners - R2 steals third, slides into third and gets hit by batted ball while safely on the base, with F5 behind third base - knowing he had no play on R2, are you now really starting to judge whether or not F5 had a shot at getting a fast B/R?   Or are you just calling R2 out because the ball hadn't yet passed F5?

A play on the ball is a play on the ball - it's about his ability to field the batted ball - the fact is, with ANY runners on base, no matter where they are, a fielder needs the opportunity to make a play on the ball in order to manage/address any of the runners - even if there is no hope to get any of them out  he still needs to opportunity to prevent them from further advancing.  In the OP F4...even F3 (depending on whether the ball passed him or blew laterally) had the opportunity to play the ball once it moved over fair territory, until it hit B/R.

What if it hit the b/r's foot and then ricocheted away from F3/F4 allowing B/R to advance to second, and other runners, if any, to advance or even score - because, if you're ruling that the runner is not out, then the ball is live, right?

 

And Savoy - you've created 17 posts and about a quarter of them have contained some kind of snark or sarcasm.  You might want to dial back the jabs to maybe 10% of your posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
22 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

Because now you start opening the door on situations with speedy runners - R2 steals third, slides into third and gets hit by batted ball while safely on the base, with F5 behind third base - knowing he had no play on F5, are you now really starting to judge whether or not F5 had a shot at getting a fast B/R?   Or are you just calling R2 out because the ball hadn't yet passed F5?

Mostly the latter.

 

Start with this: Under OBR, the runner is out when hit by a fair batted ball in fair territory.  Period.

Except:  That's not fair to the runner if he could have reasonably expected a fielder to glove the ball.  So, if the runner is immediately behind the fielder, and the ball goes through or immediately past the fielder, the runner is not out.

Except:  That's not fair to the defense who might have another fielder in position to make a play nearly immediately behind the first (either because the second fielder is "backing up" the play or because the first fielder lets the ball go by because the second fielder has a better play -- think of a ball hit in the hole and F3 lets it go by so F4 has an easier throw to first).  So, if the other fielder is there (and this part, especially, is judgment), then the runner is still out.

 

Here's this play by Evans:

Runner on second base. The batter smacks a ground ball between third base and shortstop. The ball gets by the
third baseman diving to his left and hits the runner advancing to third. In your judgment...the shortstop had a good
chance of fielding the ball and retiring the batter-runner...but...the ball hit the runner. What's your call?
RULING: The runner is declared out for being hit by a fair ball...the batter-runner is awarded first. Note: This was
not a deflected ball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

From the 2016 BRD (section 333, p. 219):

Official Interpretation:  Wendelstedt:  A runner leading off first will be called out whenever he is hit by a batted ball even if immediately passes through or by a diving first baseman. The second baseman is usually considered as still having an opportunity to field a batted ball unless he is playing in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
49 minutes ago, SavoyBG said:

Another play that I had last year in a high school game.

Two outs, bases loaded. Base hit to the outfield, first runner scores. Second runner crosses the plate but does not touch the plate. The runner from 1B then gets thrown out at 3B to end the inning. After the out, the runner who missed the plate touches the plate on his way to the dugout. Does the run count, do they have to appeal, what?

The team did not appeal, but the NJ state interpreter claims that you don't count the run because the runner did not touch the plate before the third out. I disagree. My chapter interpreter sees it my way. The run counts unless the team appeals before all the infielders have left the field. The fact that he went back and touched the plate means nothing, as he can't do that after the third out has been recorded. I think you treat it like any other missed base. The defense has to appeal, otherwise it is assumed that he touches base and the run counts.

I found this approved ruling for MLB, and the run counts unless the defense appeals.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Mr. johnnyg08, Mr. SavoyBG—that’s not what the rule says. Mr. beerguy55 is right in his analysis of the rule. Here is the pro rule (emphasis added by me):

2019 OBR rule 5.06c (6) …If a fair ball goes through, or by, an infielder, no other infielder has a chance to make a play on the ball and the ball touches a runner immediately behind the infielder that the ball went through, or by, the ball is in play and the umpire shall not declare the runner out. If a fair ball touches a runner after being deflected by an infielder, the ball is in play and the umpire shall not declare the runner out;

Nota bene, the rule does not say anything about having a reasonable chance to get an out—just a chance to field the ball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
26 minutes ago, Senor Azul said:

Mr. johnnyg08, Mr. SavoyBG—that’s not what the rule says. Mr. beerguy55 is right in his analysis of the rule. Here is the pro rule (emphasis added by me):

2019 OBR rule 5.06c (6) …If a fair ball goes through, or by, an infielder, no other infielder has a chance to make a play on the ball and the ball touches a runner immediately behind the infielder that the ball went through, or by, the ball is in play and the umpire shall not declare the runner out. If a fair ball touches a runner after being deflected by an infielder, the ball is in play and the umpire shall not declare the runner out;

Nota bene, the rule does not say anything about having a reasonable chance to get an out—just a chance to field the ball.

How the rule is written and how the rule is interpreted can often be different as is the case here. I don't believe the definition/interpretation of a play has changed with the last 30 years or so. I'd be open to hearing other thoughts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
25 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

How the rule is written and how the rule is interpreted can often be different as is the case here. I don't believe the definition/interpretation of a play has changed with the last 30 years or so. I'd be open to hearing other thoughts. 

I'm seeing perhaps more a difference between "a play" and "a play on the ball" - the definition you provided before talks about "a play" and specifically mentions the condition of having possession of the ball.   I would say it is more accurately "a play on the runner".

I would think "a play on the ball" is more in line with my thinking - an opportunity or attempt to field the ball.   A play on the ball may lead to a play on the runner, but not always - sometimes fielding the ball is just simply an effort to prevent a runner from further advancing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
4 hours ago, Senor Azul said:

Mr. johnnyg08, Mr. SavoyBG—that’s not what the rule says. Mr. beerguy55 is right in his analysis of the rule. Here is the pro rule (emphasis added by me):

2019 OBR rule 5.06c (6) …If a fair ball goes through, or by, an infielder, no other infielder has a chance to make a play on the ball and the ball touches a runner immediately behind the infielder that the ball went through, or by, the ball is in play and the umpire shall not declare the runner out. If a fair ball touches a runner after being deflected by an infielder, the ball is in play and the umpire shall not declare the runner out;

Nota bene, the rule does not say anything about having a reasonable chance to get an out—just a chance to field the ball.

So if the ball has stopped moving and is just sitting on the ground and the batter runner is already at first base and a fielder runs over and picks it up, you are saying that the fielder" had a play?"

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
5 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

 

And Savoy - you've created 17 posts and about a quarter of them have contained some kind of snark or sarcasm.  You might want to dial back the jabs to maybe 10% of your posts.

If you're that sensitive, Beer, umpiring is probably not for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
33 minutes ago, SavoyBG said:

Oh no!

 

You mean this is another one of those places where the moderators get all crazy over stupid SH*#?

 

 

Being an ass doesn't get you anywhere. You have that problem over on the other site, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
28 minutes ago, SavoyBG said:

I am against there even being moderators. People should say whatever like want, like on Usenet, unless they are committing a crime.

Well, that's consistent with the level of maturity you've shown. You want to play in a playground that someone else provides but not follow their rules.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
6 hours ago, SavoyBG said:

I am against there even being moderators. People should say whatever like want, like on Usenet, unless they are committing a crime.

Usenet is that way ----->

At least no one is there to disagree with you.

On topic: this is one of those weird situations that you have to sell it however you want to call it. I'm on the fence of calling the out, but I'm not going to pull my partner aside to change his call if he had nothing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
7 hours ago, SavoyBG said:

I am against there even being moderators. People should say whatever like want, like on Usenet, unless they are committing a crime.

Nobody is forcing you to be here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
17 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

I'm seeing perhaps more a difference between "a play" and "a play on the ball" - the definition you provided before talks about "a play" and specifically mentions the condition of having possession of the ball.   I would say it is more accurately "a play on the runner".

I would think "a play on the ball" is more in line with my thinking - an opportunity or attempt to field the ball.   A play on the ball may lead to a play on the runner, but not always - sometimes fielding the ball is just simply an effort to prevent a runner from further advancing.

Maybe for you personally. But by rule, we should use the guidance provided to us by the interpretations. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
2 hours ago, johnnyg08 said:

Maybe for you personally. But by rule, we should use the guidance provided to us by the interpretations. 

And that's fine - I'm asking if you have any of those interpretations for me to understand/see.  The definition you supplied above applies specifically to a fielder in possession of the ball.  The rule pertaining to runner interference on a batted ball occurs before possession.   There is a very clear differentiation in baseball between a play on the ball and a play on the runner - that has nothing to do with what is written, but is simply a practical and pragmatic application to how the game is played.

Playing a ball (ie. fielding a ball) entails not only trying to get a runner out, but also preventing runners from advancing.

As an axample - Probably 95% of singles hit to the outfield result in someone making a play on the ball, but zero attempt by anyone to put out a runner - LF fields ball, tosses to F4/F6, who tosses to F1 - oftentimes nobody even looks at B/R 'cause they know he's not going anywhere.  Likewise, on a slow roller in the infield, sometimes the fielder just picks up the ball to prevent anyone from going any further, and doesn't make any play on any runner - but he still had to play the ball to ensure R2 only got to third and not all the way home.

Are you saying that if a ground ball hits a runner, with the fielder behind that runner about to play the ball, that you are going to judge whether or not that fielder had a reasonable opportunity to get an out before calling the runner out?  That if, for example, R2 goes on a hit and run, slides into third base, with F5 behind him, is hit by a ground ball while he's touching the base (ie. no play on R2), that you might call nothing if B/R is a jackrabbit and would have beat the throw?   You're opening up a whole can of worms if you are.

Unless you have that interpretation handy, the standard is whether or not the fielder has a play on the ball, not whether or not he has a play on the runner.

 

15 hours ago, SavoyBG said:

So if the ball has stopped moving and is just sitting on the ground and the batter runner is already at first base and a fielder runs over and picks it up, you are saying that the fielder" had a play?"

He made a play on the ball - that's exactly what he did when he picked it up.  Whether or not he had a play on the runner is a separate discussion.

 

21 hours ago, SavoyBG said:

The team did not appeal, but the NJ state interpreter claims that you don't count the run because the runner did not touch the plate before the third out. I disagree

  So, your NJ state interpreter was clearly wrong here (and you rightly disagreed), but you're hanging your hat on the NJ state interpreter for the other call.  It's all fine and dandy when the interpreter gives you cover - that's ultimately what you want in a game/protest situation.  Doesn't mean it was actually right.

 

15 hours ago, SavoyBG said:

If you're that sensitive, Beer, umpiring is probably not for you.

Meh - sensitivity isn't my issue.  Hecklers would be a vacation compared to what I deal with on a daily basis.  If you read my post I clearly say to dial it back, not to stop.  I'm good with the occasional well placed zinger, jab, retort, quip.  But when it's all the time, it's just noise.  "But this one goes to eleven"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
11 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

  So, your NJ state interpreter was clearly wrong here (and you rightly disagreed), but you're hanging your hat on the NJ state interpreter for the other call.  It's all fine and dandy when the interpreter gives you cover - that's ultimately what you want in a game/protest situation.  Doesn't mean it was actually right.

No, I'm still open as to whether or not the no out call was correct on the popup, but since EVERY Fed interpreter here in NJ says it was, then for the purposes of that call in that game, I made what is considered the correct call here in NJ. On the play as to whether or not that run counts, only the state interpreter says no. The other 3 regional interpreters I spoke too (including my chapter guy)  say it does not count. I think there's a good chance that if we got them all together that they could get the state interpreter to reverse his ruling after discussing the play. I don't see why it would not be treated the same as any other missed base.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×