jjskitours

With R3, R2 and infield in, a ground ball to F6 gets R3 in a rundown as R2 advances and is standing on third base. R3 is chased back to third and runs past it toward the outfield. R2 is tagged on the bag then R3 who is just beyond the bag. How many outs and why?

This is a NF question so no Type A / B. It was a base hit to the outfield. Let’s say not totally sure R1 would be thrown out. In that case put R1 back to 2nd.

R1 is obstructed by F4 on his way to 2B and is easily thrown out trying for 3B. Out or return to 2B under NF.

NF Rule 3-1-4b clearly states that the original F/DH after being substituted for on defense may reenter only ONE time

With R1 and one out, B3 hits a fly ball to right field. R1 who was stealing on the pitch believes the ball will drop in and heads for 3rd. As he gets near there, the coach screams for him to go back to first since F9 caught the fly ball. R1 turns around to go back, but before he reaches second base, F9 throws the ball to F4 who steps on second base and looks at the umpire implying that he is making an appeal. R1 having touched second base, runs back to first and stands on the bag. Is R1 out on the implied appeal or must either he or 1st base be tagged (Fed and OBR)

Wow! 1-1/2 years later and still no definitive answer from NFHS?? is the general consensus that Fed now conforms with OBR and NCAA?

There was a Case Book play 9.1.1 Situation M that specifically affirmed that this was not a time play, but it is not in the 2019 Case Book. If you find out where NF has now aligned with OBR, let me know.

Bases loaded, 2 outs, B6 hits HR. He passes R1 between 1st and 2nd and is called out (3rd out). R3 was already across home and R2 was between 3rd and home. How many runs score under NF rules? Is it the same as OBR, only 1 run (time play)?

So clearly different from NF since simply reaching over the plate is OBS? I could have sworn I read something (circa 2014) that reaching across the plate with the mitt was INT.

I know at some point this issue was discussed. However, I never found a MLB / OBR rule that clearly covers the following situation. I don't want to debate whether the batter made an attempt or not to hit the pitch. Some years ago I read something that stated F2 was not guilty of INT unless his mitt went in front of the plate v just over the plate as is the NF rule. Regardless if it is same as NF or as I thought I read before, what is the OBR reference that best covers this violation.

Thanks. Found it under “Rules”. Agree with your analysis.

Either way R2 scores so only question is where was R1. Was he already at 2nd base when F2 went into dugout (?). I assume so or there would be no question. I’m being questioned based on a short video of F2 stopping the ball and immediately falling into the dugout. If ball had stopped no question, agreed. In this case TOT.

Can anyone tell me why Joe West and his crew needed to spend more than 5 minutes to determine that ball was out of play and make the appropriate 2 base award. F2 stops moving thrown ball by F7 at the lip of the dugout, but his entire body fell into the dugout with the mitt / ball still on the lip. Was there some doubt as to whether this was a dead ball?

I’m really trying to get a clear ruling for Fed when a coach clearly attempts to avoid a fielder chasing an overthrow. However, he in fact does “hinder” the fielder either by direct contact or maybe by simply forcing the fielder to alter his route to the ball. Does 3-2-3 make it INT no matter how hard the coach attempts to avoid the fielder. After all the defense made an errant throw and of course no matter what there would still be umpires judgement as to whether there would still be any play on the runner, a ball 50-60 ft away vs 20-30 ft.

I'm confused. Do we have a consensus? If a coach unintentionally interferes with a fielder (not the ball) chasing down an overthrow, is he out under NF rule 3-2-3?