goody14

I have never seen information about this topic all put into one place. So, I am going to try and summarize this with my understanding of the rules. I am asking that people give this a look and correct me where needed. For some reason, I find all the usual manuals/books/etc lacking when describing these sorts of plays. Play - Batter throws bat and it interferes with fielder FED - Out NCAA - Out OBR - Out Play - Ball rolls into bat lying on ground in fair territory (ball hits bat) FED - Nothing NCAA - Nothing OBR - Nothing Play - Batter drops bat which hits a ball that is in fair territory (bat hits ball) FED - Nothing unless intentional NCAA - Interference and out OBR - Interference and out Play - Ball in fair territory hits batter or bat in batter's hand when he is in the box FED - Foul NCAA - Foul OBR - Foul Definition - What does it mean to be "in the box" FED - At least one foot on the ground in the box (does not matter where any other foot is at) NCAA - No feet completely on the ground outside the box OBR - Both feet have to be on the ground and in the box Do I have these right?

If you search for the Kindle version, they do have a "Look Inside" option set up. You can see the Table of Contents and what they have on there. And yes, blame @noumpere if you don't like it.

I have not had a chance to read through much of it, but I was honored to be asked to contribute. Fellow UE poster @Gil is a contributor as well. My apologies if I missed anyone else.

Very nice of you to say. If we ever meet in person I will sign it for you - that raises the value $0.25 Have a great season!

Your sister in law is a wise, wise woman. She is also my 4th favorite person this evening - wife and kids barely outrank! Glad you enjoy it and thanks for the kind words.

I was doing some pre-season reading and came across this in the 2016 version of the BRD (page 26 of the print version). This is the section on order of appeals. The point he is driving home is that there is no advantageous 4th out on this play, so the order of appeals matters. But, my question is - why is R1 not a force. Later in the book (pg 171) And I am assuming there "R3" is missing between the commas at the beginning of this play. Also, "was" at the end of the second line should be "way". Unless I am missing some nuance, I cannot comprehend why these two plays have differing outcomes. Further, given the OI that if at a time a base is missed it is a force, then it will be a force on appeal, I believe the 2nd play to be the "right" ruling.

Here is old interp from 2007: The ruling states that a runner "cannot be expected to slide" because he is too far away from the base. The POE doubles down on the fact that runners do not have to slide (even calling out the FPSR). The POE seems to state that a player going straight into a base is fine as long as he does not interfere. The interp makes it sound like if the player is close to the base, they had better hit the ground. Which one is right? Or is this just verbal gymnastics?

I can think of at least reference book I would recommend...

Your sample FED play about the walk is the same for OBR. But, as noted earlier, if play 9.1.1 M is to be followed, then MLB and FED would differ on the award being honored despite the infraction. I think 9.1.1M is the outlier here.

There was a balk ground rule double last year - Bautista I think

Gil cites the NFHS rule of "no foot entirely outside the batter's box". If I remember correctly, this is language from a case play, but it was trumped by an interp (2015 maybe). Now, if a batter has "one foot completely in the box" he is still in.

Some would argue any study with umpires is blind.

I think it is important. A couple of things to remember: a) kids are generally smarter than adults give them credit for (in other words they are teachable) and b) kids mimic actions. Example: 3 games ago my kid was "playing" shortstop. Every kid that came by he tagged with his glove. I thought he was being goofy. That night at bed out of the blue he said "daddy, why weren't those kids out when I tagged them". A simple explanation that he had to have the ball and he stopped doing this. Point is he knew enough from watching to tag the runners but no one had explained the other part. Now, he knows.

Summer ball (FED rules). In trying for an out at home, the defense throws the ball to the backstop. Through a series of weird hops and cosmic intervention, the ball winds up in the home plate umpire's cooler he placed by the screen - and no, I would not believe it either if I had not been U2 when it happened. I suppose there are 2 options: 1) Treat this like throwing a ball into dead ball territory and give the runners 2 bases 2) Decide this is just a goofy happening and freeze (pun totally intended) the runners on their current bases. If they started to advance once it was noticed the ball was in the cooler, send them back My question: is there rule book justification for either of these options (or am I not thinking of an option)? Or do you just umpire and let fair play and common sense rule the day.

Here is my question. When do you consider the tag being attempted? When F3 fields the ball, Baez is clearly in fair territory. But, F3 is not close enough to make a tag. F3 takes 1-2 steps to get close enough for a tag while at the same time Baez takes 1-2 steps more towards the line. By the time the tag is attempted Baez might be back to the line making his lunge to the other side of the running lane only 3 feet of movement.

I see contact, but when I read the 4 criteria for a bona fide slide, it does list contact in and of itself being illegal. The criteria are as follows: 1) Begins his slide and makes contact with the ground before reaching the base;2) Is able and attempts to reach the base with his hand or foot;3) Is able and attempts to remain on the base (except home) after completing the slide; and4) Slides within reach without changing his path for the purpose of initiating contact with a fielder. I did not see the runner violate any of these.

I thought about this. But, I don't think your example is an advantageous 4th out because the base was not missed, rather it was not reached. The inning would be over at the moment of the assistance (I think).

When a coach physically assists a runner that runner is out but the ball is not killed. This gives the defense an opportunity to gain more outs on a play. I had someone ask me the other day if it would be proper just to end all playing action if this were to happen with 2 already out in the inning. At this point, there are no more outs to be gained and letting the play continue could confuse things. Would there be a reason to let play continue in this situation?

I used this video along with the CCA when I was cramming before my first state assignment. I felt like I had the basics. Otherwise, be honest with your crew about your experience level so they can help out. Lastly, have an in depth pre-game about it.

This is not a balk. From PBUC (emphasis mine): a) The pitcher shall be charged with a balk if, while in contact with the rubber, he attempts a pickoff at first or third base and throws to the fielder who is either in front of or behind the base and obviously not making an attempt at retiring the runner. However, there is no violation if the pitcher throws the ball directly to first or third base in this situation. Also note that there is no violation if the pitcher attempts a pickoff at second base and throws to an infielder who is in front of or behind the base (i.e., this violation is only in reference to pickoffs at first and third base).

We must have seen the same FB post. This was the rabbit hole that made me think of what rule interps matched in FED/OBR but not NCAA - there aren't many.

If the pitch happens to be strike 3 with 2 outs...batter is out and no run scores.

If he was stealing, he gets to keep the base.

6.01(a) PENALTY discusses where to place runners after interference has occurred. It has the concept of an intervening play. What if no intervening play is made - as in the defense does not attempt to get R3 out. I have seen many squeeze plays executed so well that the pitcher fields the ball and only makes a play on the BR. In these situations, R3 has scored well before any throw is completed to first. This would not matter in FED since we place runners TOI after interference, but how would we handle in OBR/NCAA.

This is more of a thought exercise, curiosity of mine...click the back button if this does not interest you. Lots of rules are the same at the 3 major levels. A good number of rules are different at all 3 levels. When there are differences I think it is fair to say that FED tends to be the outlier. NCAA/OBR tend to run together. My question: What are the instances where FED/OBR agree but NCAA has a different interpretation? I could only think of 2 (and I am not 100% sure of them). Does this rarity actually exist?