NFHS Rules Presentation

[Sayhey]

We have to score 90% to work playoff games. We can take the test 4 times. Thanks for your suggestion to peruse the thread. I just read every post at midnight and my head is spinning. I have actually struggled with this rule for years. When this situation occurs it happens very fast in most cases. I usually see it on a drag bunt from the left side. 6.05 (g) states that a batter/ runner is out when his batted ball contacts him over fair territory. The Fed. Question we are talking about states that the batter bats a ball legally.

This isn't a description of a batter chopping the ball into the dirt and the ball coming up immediately and striking the bat or the batter. It is a description of a legally batted ball that contacts a batter over fair territory. How can that not be interference? My test wouldn't tell me which questions I got wrong. Just a score. On line test. I'm fairly certain I got this question wrong and the Feds. Are calling this a foul ball. I haven't seen a "slide" yet. One poster seemed to hit the nail on the head when he said we need a clear definition of in the batter's box. Are you out of the box with one foot completely out of the box and on the ground? Do we simply have yet another O.B.R. - Federation rule difference?

[Sayhey]

I went back into the test. Question # 77 is the one I'm talking about. I hope it is the question posters are speaking about. What is a "stride through"? The scenario that is described includes something the Feds are calling a "stride through". I answered that the batter/runner is out because he was contacted by his own batted ball in fair territory.

I didn't see where the batter's box saved him.

[JaxRolo]

I don't get why some states allow multiple tries at the test. By the 4th time you should be able to score 100.

We get 1 try . 50 questions 75 minutes.

If you know you only have 1 try open the books and study hard.

[Mick]

Did Clara have one foot outside of the voting booth?

[noumpere]

I went back into the test. Question # 77 is the one I'm talking about. I hope it is the question posters are speaking about. What is a "stride through"? The scenario that is described includes something the Feds are calling a "stride through". I answered that the batter/runner is out because he was contacted by his own batted ball in fair territory.

I didn't see where the batter's box saved him.

Maybe if you posted the exact question and answers, instead of the cryptic hints, you'd get a more clear response.

 

Also note that FED changed the rule (apparently) this year.

 

And, just because you saw it in a pro game doesn't mean (a) it applies in FED; (b) the pro umpires saw what you saw; or © the pro umpires got it right.

[clawdad]

I think we all agree that the slide in the NFHS Powerpoint presentation could be illustrated better.  But for the sake of calling it in a HS game, #16 this thread http://umpire-empire.com/index.php/topic/60583-baseball-rules-interpretations-2015/ is what the slide intends to represent.

 

SITUATION 16: The batter legally contacts the pitch with his bat and his lead foot then lands on the ground outside of the batter’s box. The batted ball contacts the ground in front of home plate and spins back, contacting the batter’s leg that is outside the batter’s box. RULING: This is a foul ball. With one foot still in the batter’s box, the batter is considered to be in the batter’s box at the time he was contacted by the batted ball. (2-16-1g)

[Sayhey]

I have the casebook for 2015 as well as the rule book. I have a picture of a batter in the front of the box legally batting a pitch. The Feds. Say it was legally batted. It's question #77 on the National test. I initially answered that the batter was out for interference. Batter/runner hit by fair batted ball that hasn't passed a fringe infielder or been deflected by a pitcher. I answered incorrectly according to a bureaucrat in Indianapolis. The 2015 rule book or casebook doesn't clarify this issue. Must be why we have the picture to define what being in the batter's box really means. The picture is confusing. The batter/ runner isn't running yet. It's not Like a drag bunt. I envisioned a drag bunt and a batter/runner struck by a fair batted ball. That's why I said out on the test. Now that I have seen the picture I can see that the batter is simply struck by a batted ball that comes up immediately. The twist is a batter that was way up in the box and does something that no batter will do and that's hit a pitch with his front foot in the air and then his "stride through" places his foot outside the batter's box.

Question: doesn't this contradict O.B.R.? Question: why do we need to be assosiated with the Indianapolis rules writers? Can a state do their own thing? We need a clarification picture to clarify the clarification picture.

[johnnyg08]

Read interpretation #16.  (I think it's 16)

 

This exact play is in the interpretations.

[Jimurray]

Read interpretation #16.  (I think it's 16)

 

This exact play is in the interpretations.

Unfortunately, the promised change to the offending caseplay has not taken place in 2016:

"8.4.1 SITUATION B: B1 squares to bunt and hits the pitch. The batted ball bounces off the plate and hits B1’ s (a) leg or, (b) bat a second time while B1 is holding the bat in the batter’s box (no foot is entirely outside of the batter’s box). RULING: In (a), it is a foul ball. In (b), the ball is foul unless, in the umpire’s judgment, the ball was contacted intentionally, in which case the ball would be dead and B1 declared out."