Childress and FPSR

[grayhawk]

Childress is blowing my mind with the BRD (2011 edition) regarding Fed FPSR.  For those that have it, it's on page 226, Section 329.  Basically, he says that in Fed, if a runner slides in the direction of the fielder on a force, that this is not an FPSR violation unless he makes contact or alters the play.  Here is the case play:

 

*Play 171-329: FED only.  Bases loaded.  B1 grounds to F4, who fields the ball and throws to F6 to start the double play.  F6 catches the throw and forces out R1 as F6 crosses the bag to the right field side.  F6 now throws to first as retired R1 begins his slide into second.  Retired R1's slide is clearly to the right side of the bag (the side F6 is now on).  R1 is sliding toward F6, but he misses the shortstop by a foot or two as F6 keeps moving after the throw.  F6's throw is in time to retire BR at first; meanwhile, R3 scores.  Ruling: Even though it is obvious the runner is illegally sliding toward the fielder, it is not interference.  The ball remains alive: two out, R3 in, R2 on third.

 

AO 44-329: McNeely: Writing on the URC Message Board to explain his ruling for play 171 above: "The best answer I can provide is if a baserunner commits an illegal slide, and during that illegal slide makes contact with a fielder or alters the immediate play, call the interference.  If the illegal slide occurred, but it did not alter the play or no contact was made, there is no call.  If the avoidance of the contact was due to the action by the fielder, it still did not happen and I would not call it." (URC, 3/20/00) (See Play 174 [this section] for an opposite ruling by the NCAA.)

 

The above is in direct opposition to what I know about Fed FPSR.  Is he just flat out incorrect?  Has this been changed in later editions of the BRD?  I looked this up because I am watching GT/Vandy right now and have seen two instances of a runner sliding toward a fielder on a force (not directly into the base) and wanted to look up the NCAA rule.  The BRD clearly states that in the NCAA, sliding towards a fielder who is not in the baseline extended, is a violation.  In neither case was it called.

[umpcoachfather]

I think it should stop being referred to as the FPSR.  The interp based on that name is you have to slide.  I actually heard an umpire at a plate meeting state " You must slide to avoid contact"  I spoke to him after and he wouldnt listen.  they need to define a slide and then state when you slide it needs to be legal.  Get rid of any and all ref's to FPSR. 

[mstaylor]

Already done, they define what a legal slide is, that a slide is not required, and in what instances the play should be called. The problem is McNeeley is a wing ding in FED and his post is contrary to everything taught.

Sent from my C771 using Tapatalk 2

[sdix00]

The FPSR is not a rule. It is two rules and when it first came out it was written "Force Play / Slide Rule". In its current form It covers interference on a force play and it also adds an additional requirement to a legal slide, applicable during a force play.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 4 Beta

[noumpere]

I think it should stop being referred to as the FPSR.  The interp based on that name is you have to slide.  I actually heard an umpire at a plate meeting state " You must slide to avoid contact"  I spoke to him after and he wouldnt listen.  they need to define a slide and then state when you slide it needs to be legal.  Get rid of any and all ref's to FPSR. 

I think that's done and if you read about an illegal slide it says something like:

 

a) roll block AND MAKE CONTCT

b) go beyond the base AND MAKE CONTACT

c) on a force play do not slide directly into the base

 

etc.

 

Note that the last one does not have the "AND MAKE CONTACT" wording

 

(sorry I don't have the books handy for the exact wording, and I know there are more than three definitions of illegal slide)