<acronym title='Federation Rules (High School)'>FED</acronym> notable rules / differences cheat sheet

[Welpe]

I figured I'd drag this up since I've been researching FED pitching rules and this came up on a search.

You may want to include in the document that the definition of a windup and set position are a little different than OBR.

Also, what is this interpretation based upon?

"NFHS 6-1-2-If a pitcher steps onto the rubber in the windup position with his hands apart, then brings both hands together at the same time, he is considered to have begun his motion to pitch."

From reading casebook play 6.1.2 Situation C, it seems that this would be legal.

[mstaylor]

I think part of your post is missing.

[Welpe]

It was my thought that was incomplete. What I meant was that it seems from the case book play, that the pitcher could bring his hands together in the windup and pause before beginning his motion to pitch.

[mstaylor]

Hand, not hands. He can have his hands hanging, bring one hand up then the other. Two body parts equals TOP.

[Welpe]

6.1.2 Sit C says hands.

[yawetag]

Hand, not hands. He can have his hands hanging, bring one hand up then the other. Two body parts equals TOP.

Does anyone call this?

[Jimurray]

6.1.2 Sit C says hands.

It says hand but one hand is already up in front of his body. If both hands were at his side a movement together would be TOP and no stop would be allowed. But, it is not widely understood and never called in my area. Nobody complains.

[Welpe]

Again I ask, what is this interpretation based upon? That isn't clear from just the rule. OBR does not prohibit this, correct?

[Jimurray]

Again I ask, what is this interpretation based upon? That isn't clear from just the rule. OBR does not prohibit this, correct?

It's in the definition of TOP in 2-28-3. Also should be in the casebook in the same section you're looking at. But, make sure it's called that way in your area. OBR does not prohibit this and it's not called in FED in my neck of the woods.

[Welpe]

Ah shoot...Rule 2 strikes again. Thank you for the reference. There are no case plays involving both hands together but the rule is clear. And trust me I'm not looking to call it unless it is expected here. Yikes.

[Jimurray]

Ah shoot...Rule 2 strikes again. Thank you for the reference. There are no case plays involving both hands together but the rule is clear. And trust me I'm not looking to call it unless it is expected here. Yikes.

The caseplay for this is 2.28.3 Sit.C. I believe my out for not calling this is that I'm always going to see one hand lead the other by a little bit. Semantics but I haven't had to use that out.

[Welpe]

Ah I see that now, I misread it earlier. I'm really batting 1.000 today....at least I get the rule now. :no:

[mstaylor]

Again, if it is part of his settling on the rubber then let it go. If he is on and settled, why wouldn't you call it. It is no different than a Justin Beiber blowing a stop in the set.

[Welpe]

Again, if it is part of his settling on the rubber then let it go. If he is on and settled, why wouldn't you call it. It is no different than a Justin Beiber blowing a stop in the set.

I have no idea what that was supposed to actually say but it is hilarious in its current form.

[mstaylor]

Again, if it is part of his settling on the rubber then let it go. If he is on and settled, why wouldn't you call it. It is no different than a Justin Beiber blowing a stop in the set.

I have no idea what that was supposed to actually say but it is hilarious in its current form.

Just change Justin Beiber to pitcher, but it is funny the way it is.

[jjskitours]

Under Fed rules an Infield Fly does not have to be decalred by the umpires to be in effect (Case Book 7.4.1 G). It is my understanding

that under OBR that it must be declared to be in effect. At least this is my interpretation of 2.00 Infield Fly Comment. Does anyone

interpret it differently and if so, is there any case or reliable source to support it being the same as Fed.

[noumpere]

Its different from FED but it doesnt need to be declared as it happens.

[jjskitours]

From Jaska/Roder: A fly ball that meets all the requirements for an infield fly, but is not declared as such is not an infield fly. The resulting action is allowed; however, the umpires should not allow a double play that an infield fly was intended to prevent...

As a separate note and this is same as Fed: If an infield fly was improperly declared, the batter is not out. Both teams are required to know that the fly was not an infield fly, even though it was declared as such. The declared infield fly is nullified due to the impossibility of its existence."

[noumpere]

Since your not going to allow the double play then if you dont declare it but the defense turns the DP then you have to go back and declare it retroactively.

[mstaylor]

In youth baseball, definitely go back and fix it. Post HS, it is less clear.