Gardy Wants an INT DP

[GreyhoundAggie]

5.1.1 SITUATION J:

With a fielder in position to make a play, R2 is on first and R1 is (a) between second and third or (b) touching second. R1 is hit by ball batted by B3.

RULING: The ball becomes dead immediately in (a) and (b). In (a), R1 is out. He is also out in (b), unless it is declared an infield fly. In (a) and (b), unless B3 is out because it is an infield fly, he is entitled to first base. R2 is awarded second base.

 

 

 

The case book clearly states this play, almost identically to the situation originally rendered. No mention of a DP. It says R1 is out and the B/R is entitled to first base.

 

This fairly clearly shows FED's interpretation of the rule. You can say "it doesn't mention a DP being possible" but it also doesn't mention a DP not being possible.

 

I agree with scrounge that the wording is confusing in 8-4-2g. I re-read it multiple times to try and understand exactly what it is trying to say.

 

I'd be interested in any other people who call FED, or interpret FED rules for their association to chime in.

[grayhawk]

8-4-2g maps out several situations where "Any runner is out when he..."

 

The situations described are:

 

- Intentionally interferes with a throw or thrown ball

- Hinders a fielder on his initial attempt to field a batted ball

- His (the runner) being put out is prevented by an illegal act by anyone connected with the team (2-21-1, 3-2-2, 3-2-3) or by the batter-runner

- For runner returning to base (8-2-6)

- Runner being hit by a batted ball (8-4-2k)

 

The rule then goes on to explain that "If, in the judgement of the umpire, a runner including the batter-runner interferes in any way and prevents a double play anywhere, two shall be declared out (the runner who interfered, and the other runner involved).

 

There is no logical way to apply the last sentence to some of the described situations, and not others.  The statement applies to each and every one of the scenarios described in 8-4-2g, including a runner being hit by a batted ball.  There is no way around it.

 

Being hit with a batted ball IS interference.  It is covered under the definition of Interference in 2-21-1a, and the 2011 WUM describes "Runner's Interference" in 9.2 (pages 230-231):

 

It is interference by a runner when:

 

"A fair ball touches a runner on fair territory..."

 

Also, Jim Evans describes the mechanics for when a runner is hit with a batted ball as:

 

Time mechanic, "Time!"

Point at the runner, "That's Interference!"

Hammer the out, "He's out!"

[maven]

Rule 5-1-1 concerns live ball/dead ball. The case you quote illustrates that the ball is dead immediately on runner INT. It also addresses what to do with the BR, who has not yet reached 1B, and other runners (return to TOI base unless forced to advance by award to BR).

 

If case plays were written to address all contingencies, they'd be pages long and useless. 5.1.1 illustrates 5-1-1, and we should not read into it more than that.

[GreyhoundAggie]

We are going to agree to disagree on this particular case.

 

I will have to ask the rules interpreter for TASO and see what their interpretation is. They consult with the FED rule makers on tough plays if need be.

 

If I get a response I'll let you know what is said. That is an awfully big penalization of a team to assume the DP. You don't award double plays if an umpire unintentionally interferes with a play.

 

I understand the offense is the one interfering on a runner being hit, but still.

 

I love discussing these types of things, one of the reasons I love this board.

[ALStripes17]

We are going to agree to disagree on this particular case.

I will have to ask the rules interpreter for TASO and see what their interpretation is. They consult with the FED rule makers on tough plays if need be.

If I get a response I'll let you know what is said. That is an awfully big penalization of a team to assume the DP. You don't award double plays if an umpire unintentionally interferes with a play.

I understand the offense is the one interfering on a runner being hit, but still.

I love discussing these types of things, one of the reasons I love this board.

Advice to the offense: don't hit what would be considered a DP ball if you don't want the umpire to call 2 out on you.

As far as umpire INT, umpires have no stake in the game, runners do. I've seen the offense penalized on an umpire INT... take a guess how :)

[maven]

As far as umpire INT, umpires have no stake in the game, runners do. I've seen the offense penalized on an umpire INT... take a guess how

You've never seen the offense (or the defense either, for that matter) properly penalized after umpire INT: the rule carries no penalty, merely a provision for dealing with a BR whom the defense did not put out.

[ALStripes17]

As far as umpire INT, umpires have no stake in the game, runners do. I've seen the offense penalized on an umpire INT... take a guess how

You've never seen the offense (or the defense either, for that matter) properly penalized after umpire INT: the rule carries no penalty, merely a provision for dealing with a BR whom the defense did not put out.

Oh I understand it's not a penalty for either. Explain that to the HC that asked me why his runner from 3rd (tying run) had to go back to 3B after my BU got hit in "C."

[GreyhoundAggie]

So I stand corrected gentleman. Sent this scenario to our rules interpreter for the state of Texas in TASO.

 

"I'd use 8-4-2g and 8-4-1h and get a DP.  R2 has committed interference.  Ball is dead immediately and the BR is called out also.  The runner at 1st is returned to 1st.  I'm assuming R2 was on 2nd and R1 on 1st since R2 was hit by a ball to the SS."

 

So he said intent doesn't matter, get the DP if one is obvious.

 

I will say this has never come up or happened in my 6+ yr umpiring career. So I have never kicked it yet

 

Hopefully this clears it up.

[Sayhey]

Old skool may be Brian Knights father up in Montanna. If so, how is the fishing up there?

Can someone , anyone, pleeeezzz tell me why we need different rules in high school than summer ball like legion and summer college ball

If you are in high school keep your helmet on and don't crash the pivot man on a double play. That is the only changes we need to the obr. O.B.R. Needs intent to get a double play and Fed. Needs a possible double play. Why not one rule book.

What are the Fed. Rules writers trying to accomplish by treating this situation differently than O.B.R. How is this possibly a safety issue.

[Sayhey]

The Fed. Book is so poorly written that associations need interpreters to tell the working umpires what the writers meant when they write the rag they call a rule book.

We are dealing with people that can not understand that a runner on third base is R-3, not R-1. People that write a casebook that is so hard to follow that you must read the question 2-3 times. Pathetic excuse for a rule book. Just to further confuse the situation : O.B.R. Provides no provision for any other runner being called out other than the batter runner

Feds say "the other runner being played on". If a batter/ runner intentionally interferes you bang the runner who is close to home but R-2 interfering you can only call the batter/runner out if you are calling 2 out

[ALStripes17]

The Fed. Book is so poorly written that associations need interpreters to tell the working umpires what the writers meant when they write the rag they call a rule book.

We are dealing with people that can not understand that a runner on third base is R-3, not R-1. People that write a casebook that is so hard to follow that you must read the question 2-3 times. Pathetic excuse for a rule book. Just to further confuse the situation : O.B.R. Provides no provision for any other runner being called out other than the batter runner

Feds say "the other runner being played on". If a batter/ runner intentionally interferes you bang the runner who is close to home but R-2 interfering you can only call the batter/runner out if you are calling 2 out

Where in FED does it say the 2nd out HAS to be BR? The only instance I know of that is under Force Play Slide Rule. But if R2 is doing the interfering, FPSR would most likely come into play at 3B... which is rare IMO