FED discussion of FPSR - NCAA Case Play #2

[Richvee]

play wasn't being made on R1 though .........that's where this makes is not as clear cut as you describe above.   Like  I've said before, ...I UNDERSTAND how it can easily be argued FPSR ...no doubt .......

That's the crux of the disagreement. It doesn't say the play has to be being made on R1. Just the fact that his illegal slide altered the act of the fielder  making A PLAY.

[Thunderheads]

That's the crux of the disagreement. It doesn't say the play has to be being made on R1. Just the fact that his illegal slide altered the act of the fielder  making A PLAY.

so ...are you saying YOU'RE grabbing 2 here?

[ricka56]

Here's the penalty: "On a force-play slide with less than two outs, the runner is declared out, as well as the batter-runner." 8-4-2 PENALTY

Was R1 forced to advance? Yes. R1 was forced until he became R2. He became R2 before any play is made...so, no force is in affect.

Did he slide? Yes. R1 did, R2 popped-up

Was that a force-play slide? Yes. No, there was never any force play ... R2 interferred.

Was the slide legal? No. Correct, the pop-up hindering F4's throw  to 1B was not legal.

Put it together: FPSR violation, and with less than 2 outs BR is out. It does not add up to 2 outs

R1 running on the pitch, GB to F6, R1 rounds 2B (becomes R2) and runs into (interferes with) F6 between 2B and 3B. Is that a FPSR violation ? If not, when was FPSR no longer applicable ? 

[scrounge]

 

 

R1 running on the pitch, GB to F6, R1 rounds 2B (becomes R2) and runs into (interferes with) F6 between 2B and 3B. Is that a FPSR violation ? If not, when was FPSR no longer applicable ? 

There's no bastardization needed. *IF* you judge the runner made it there before any play began, then it's more like the example quoted here, then there's only one out to be had. *IF* you judge that the slide is part of the same play and the fielder had begun that play before R1 reaching 2B, then you can invoke FSPR. I lean to 2 separate plays, but I'm not about to get self-righteous if someone else sees 1 play and calls FSPR. It certainly fits the spirit of it.

Edited December 17, 2015 by scrounge

[ricka56]

There's no bastardization needed. *IF* you judge the runner made it there before any play began, then it's more like the example quoted here, then there's only one out to be had. *IF* you judge that the slide is part of the same play and the fielder had begun that play before R1 reaching 2B, then you can invoke FSPR. I lean to 2 separate plays, but I'm not about to get self-righteous if someone else sees 1 play and calls FSPR. It certainly fits the spirit of it.

If you judge that there was a play on R1 at 2B (half of the respondents from the video had that), then FPSR is applicable. If you had no play at 2B in the NCAA version (and awarded R1/R2 home), then judging that there was a force play in a HS version of the same play is contradictory.

[scrounge]

If you judge that there was a play on R1 at 2B (half of the respondents from the video had that), then FPSR is applicable. If you had no play at 2B in the NCAA version (and awarded R1/R2 home), then ruling that there was a force play in a HS version of the same play is contradictory.

Yes, that's pretty much exactly what I said, but thanks for re-stating it.

Edited December 17, 2015 by scrounge

[grayhawk]

so ...are you saying YOU'RE grabbing 2 here?

I am, at least with the benefit of the video.  In real time, standing on the field, I'm not certain but that pop-up slide "into the fielder" is pretty evident.  All he had to do was stay down and there's no contact or interference.

[Thunderheads]

I am, at least with the benefit of the video.  In real time, standing on the field, I'm not certain but that pop-up slide "into the fielder" is pretty evident.  All he had to do was stay down and there's no contact or interference.

understood ...

however .........

you grab 2 on this specific play ....and you're going to have an EJ as well .......  ('you' as in 'anyone', ...not grayhawk specifically)

Edited December 17, 2015 by Thunderheads

[grayhawk]

understood ...

however .........

you grab 2 on this specific play ....and you're going to have an EJ as well .......  ('you' as in 'anyone', ...not grayhawk specifically)

I honestly don't think so in most cases.  There are a few coaches that might push it too far, but I think I'd be able to manage the situation successfully.

[Thunderheads]

I honestly don't think so in most cases.  There are a few coaches that might push it too far, but I think I'd be able to manage the situation successfully.

Then you're lucky because in my experience ....... knowing and understanding FPSR for most HS coaches is an improbability.   Grabbing 2 on that play, then explaining the ruling will lead them to believe you're making crap up! LOL!

[grayhawk]

Then you're lucky because in my experience ....... knowing and understanding FPSR for most HS coaches is an improbability.   Grabbing 2 on that play, then explaining the ruling will lead them to believe you're making crap up! LOL!

Actually, many of them think that ALL pop-up slides are illegal, so they may just accept the explanation and move on.  It certainly would depend on how close the game is and if this was a critical moment.

[Thunderheads]

Actually, many of them think that ALL pop-up slides are illegal, so they may just accept the explanation and move on.  It certainly would depend on how close the game is and if this was a critical moment.

hard for me to believe when all I hear during the HS season is ...... "break up the DP" ....  

[grayhawk]

hard for me to believe when all I hear during the HS season is ...... "break up the DP" ....  

Hearing that certainly gets your "spidey senses" tingling, doesn't it?

[Thunderheads]

Hearing that certainly gets your "spidey senses" tingling, doesn't it?

SURE DOES!!!  I just shake my head!

Like I said before ..sounds like coaches in your area have a better grasp of FPSR than over here ....

[stkjock]

great discussion on this play - thanks all for the education.

 

In the vid - no contact with F4 do you still call FPSR?

 

and to alter the play a bit, it R1 slides and stays down:

 

No contact = "that's nothing" ??

F4 still makes contact with R1, despite him still being on his butt, then do you still have FPSR?

 

Edited December 17, 2015 by stkjock

[noumpere]

great discussion on this play - thanks all for the education.

 

In the vid - no contact with F4 do you still call FPSR?

 

and to alter the play a bit, it R1 slides and stays down:

 

No contact = "that's nothing" ??

F4 still makes contact with R1, despite him still being on his butt, then do you still have FPSR?

 

In FED, a pop-up slide is illegal only with contact or alteration of the play.

 

If R1 stays down, and in the line between the bases, then it's legal.

 

In FED, if R1 goes to the side of the fielder on a FP, then it's (supposed to be) two outs, even with no contact / alteration.

 

In FED, if R1 goes beyond the base -- it's illegal only with contact (and the contact must be beyond the base; contact on / in front of the base is legal even if R1 then continues beyond the base)

[johnnyg08]

hard for me to believe when all I hear during the HS season is ...... "break up the DP" ....  

Keep calling it.  Eventually you'll be the guy who makes them play legally.  

It used to be an issue for me in my FED games.  I had the same teams the next year and the clean slides were awesome.  I'm hoping it made it easier for the other crews as well.

[stkjock]

@noumpere Thanks for the response. 

[Richvee]

so ...are you saying YOU'RE grabbing 2 here?

yes

[Mike Walsh]

Where is the FP ? Illegal slide/interference. R1 out, BR gets 1B.

There is no FP at 2B so FPSR does not apply. If you believe that R1 "interferes in any way that prevents a double play" (8.4.2g), then you can get two outs. Since R1 was safe at 2B, there could not be a DP. But he did interfere with F4 making a play on BR.  

i think most of the discussion fails to acknowledge that removing the force because R1 made it to 2nd safely does not mean the FPSR no longer applies. The rule doesn't require a force out. It means that when the ball is hit and a force play is possible, the runner must slide directly to the base. In the video, he didn't, so he can and should be called for a FPSR violation.

MIke

[ricka56]

The rule doesn't require a force out. It means that when the ball is hit and a force play is possible,

Where did you get that from? A play is defined as a legitimate attempt to retire the runner...not the possibility of an attempt to retire a runner at the time the ball is batted. This is what I mean by bastardization of the rule. The rule specifically say, On a force-play ...it  doesn't say "when the ball is hit and a force play is possible".  When R2 interference occurred, there was not even a possibility of a force play. 

I know that R2 broke a Fed rule by popping up illegally and he should be penalized, but F4 was the one that really screwed up this play and he's being bailed out with a DP ?!? On the play under NCAA or OBR rules, where we would not penalize any outs but instead award bases, is this interence so egregious in a HS game that it warrants the maximum penalty ? If the answer is maybe not, then why bastardize the rule to maximize the penalty. Why not use the rule as written to do the right thing ?  I don't get it. 

I find it humorous that this thread has the juxtaposition of me debating the recidivus rule geeks ... insisting that they should go by the rule as written instead of bastardizing it to fit their needs. 

[Richvee]

Where did you get that from? A play is defined as a legitimate attempt to retire the runner...not the possibility of an attempt to retire a runner at the time the ball is batted. This is what I mean by bastardization of the rule. The rule specifically say, On a force-play ...it  doesn't say "when the ball is hit and a force play is possible".  When R2 interference occurred, there was not even a possibility of a force play. 

I know that R2 broke a Fed rule by popping up illegally and he should be penalized, but F4 was the one that really screwed up this play and he's being bailed out with a DP ?!? On the play under NCAA or OBR rules, where we would not penalize any outs but instead award bases, is this interence so egregious in a HS game that it warrants the maximum penalty ? If the answer is maybe not, then why bastardize the rule to maximize the penalty. Why not use the rule as written to do the right thing ?  I don't get it. 

I find it humorous that this thread has the juxtaposition of me debating the recidivus rule geeks ... insisting that they should go by the rule as written instead of bastardizing it to fit their needs. 

I don't see any bastardization here at all.

Are you disagreeing with the premise that a runner can can still be guilty of  FPSR violation after he is safe? Again I refer you to caseplay 8.4.2w  that gets a FPSR violation after the forced runner is safe.

There is no comparison of FED's FPSR to NCAA or OBR. One has nothing to do with the other two. And  FPSR has nothing to do with how egregious the interference is, or how probable or improbable  a double play was.

R1 illegally popped up and altered the actions a F4 making a play. Nowhere does it say he has to alter a play being made on him. He simply illegally altered a play while popping up on a base he was forced to. That's 2 in FED. Doesn't matter one bit that this same play results in a totally different outcome in OBR and NCAA.

We disagree I suppose. Great thread. But I don't think anyone is changing anyone's mind on how they feel here. 

[Richvee]

 On the play under NCAA or OBR rules, where we would not penalize any outs but instead award bases, is this interence so egregious in a HS game that it warrants the maximum penalty ?

 

Should we give the FED kid a 2 run homer because F1 balked with R1 and proceed to deliver a pitch that B2 hit over the CF wall? After all, it's 2 runs in OBR and NCAA. Why are we rewarding F1? 

[ricka56]

Are you disagreeing with the premise that a runner can can still be guilty of  FPSR violation after he is safe? Again I refer you to caseplay 8.4.2w  that gets a FPSR violation after the forced runner is safe.

Yes, a runner can be guilty of FPSR when he is safe. The difference between the OP and the 8-4-2W, is that there actually was a play on R3 at HP ... says so in the CP. A play can have either outcome, 8-4-2W has a play on the runner...the OP, not so much (unless you rule there was a play on the runner, independent of the rule set).

Should we give the FED kid a 2 run homer because F1 balked with R1 and proceed to deliver a pitch that B2 hit over the CF wall? After all, it's 2 runs in OBR and NCAA. Why are we rewarding F1? 

Fed kid didn't hit a HR, he hit a dead ball over the CF wall. Give B a penalty strike for delaying the game...haw

Follow the prescribed rule set. Don't make up your own rules.  

We disagree I suppose. Great thread. But I don't think anyone is changing anyone's mind on how they feel here. 

Don't be such a humbug...tis the season for miracles.