Catcher's Obstruction - runner awards

[NavyChiefBlue]

Question on test

R3 is on third and R2 on second with one out when B4’s swing is obstructed by F2. Even though third is occupied, R2 is attempting to steal third. B4 hits a ground ball to F6 who throws B4 out at first. Because of the catcher’s obstruction the coach has the option of taking the play or the award. He takes the award. B4 is awarded first, R2 third, and R3 home.

True or False?

Thanks

Edited January 5, 2016 by NavyChiefBlue

[Jimurray]

Question on test

R3 is on third and R2 on second with one out when B4’s swing is obstructed by F2. Even though third is occupied, R2 is attempting to steal third. B4 hits a ground ball to F6 who throws B4 out at first. Because of the catcher’s obstruction the coach has the option of taking the play or the award. He takes the award. B4 is awarded first, R2 third, and R1 home.

True or False?

Thanks

I would go with false. BTW did you or was it the test writer who switched runner terminology in the middle of the question?

[NavyChiefBlue]

I would go with false. BTW did you or was it the test writer who switched runner terminology in the middle of the question?

I did, it's fixed now.

[grayhawk]

I would say true.  There is no exception that I am aware of that says a stealing runner isn't awarded the base he is stealing because the next base is occupied by a runner who isn't stealing.  BR is awarded first, R2 is awarded third (because he was stealing) and R3 is awarded home because he was forced by R2.

 

ART. 1 . . . Each runner other than the batter-runner (who is governed by 8-1-2) is awarded one base when: 

c. he is attempting to steal or he is forced from the base he occupies by a batter-runner or runner who must advance because the catcher or any fielder obstructs the batter, such as stepping on or across home or pushing the batter to reach the pitch or touching the bat (8-1-1e). Instances may occur when the infraction may be ignored (8-1-1e).

[Richvee]

 

ooops..should have read the second bolded part of @grayhawk posts before I posted....nevermind...

Edited January 5, 2016 by Richvee

[Jimurray]

I would say true.  There is no exception that I am aware of that says a stealing runner isn't awarded the base he is stealing because the next base is occupied by a runner who isn't stealing.  BR is awarded first, R2 is awarded third (because he was stealing) and R3 is awarded home because he was forced by R2.

 

ART. 1 . . . Each runner other than the batter-runner (who is governed by 8-1-2) is awarded one base when: 

c. he is attempting to steal or he is forced from the base he occupies by a batter-runner or runner who must advance because the catcher or any fielder obstructs the batter, such as stepping on or across home or pushing the batter to reach the pitch or touching the bat (8-1-1e). Instances may occur when the infraction may be ignored (8-1-1e).

The first question is whether the runner on 2B was legitimately attempting to steal. WUM says that the OP is not a legitimate steal attempt. 

The second question is whether FED agrees with WUM. If they do not do they force the runner on 3B? With balls out of play we do not force runners beyond their base award. But in other cases we do force runners.

[grayhawk]

The first question is whether the runner on 2B was legitimately attempting to steal. WUM says that the OP is not a legitimate steal attempt. 

The second question is whether FED agrees with WUM. If they do not do they force the runner on 3B? With balls out of play we do not force runners beyond their base award. But in other cases we do force runners.

Can you post the text from the WUM?  I don't have mine at the office.  Based solely on the Fed rule, I don't see any way to judge that this wasn't a legitimate steal attempt.  The KISS principle tells me to award the bases.

[Jimurray]

Can you post the text from the WUM?  I don't have mine at the office.  Based solely on the Fed rule, I don't see any way to judge that this wasn't a legitimate steal attempt.  The KISS principle tells me to award the bases.

Page 170 on my circa 2010 WUM regarding CI:

"a legitimate steal attempt does not include where one runner is attempting to steal a base already occupied by another runner, and that other runner is not attempting to steal as well."

[grayhawk]

Page 170 on my circa 2010 WUM regarding CI:

"a legitimate steal attempt does not include where one runner is attempting to steal a base already occupied by another runner, and that other runner is not attempting to steal as well."

That's a great interp.  As you said, does Fed agree?  There's no case play that I know of that would confirm it one way or another.

[Richvee]

That's a great interp.  As you said, does Fed agree?  There's no case play that I know of that would confirm it one way or another.

Which makes it a perfect FED test question. 

[Senor Azul]

Under Federation rules the answer to the question posed in the OP would be True. Here's why:

 

From the 2015 NFHS Baseball Rules Book:

8-1-1e-1 Any runner attempting to advance (i.e., steal or squeeze) on a catcher’s obstruction of the batter shall be awarded the base he is attempting. If a runner is not attempting to advance on the catcher’s obstruction, he shall not be entitled to the next base, if not forced to advance because of the batter being awarded first base….

From the 2015 NFHS Baseball Case Book:

8.1.1 Situation N:  R3 and R2, with one out. F2 obstructs B4 who hits a ground ball to F4. R2 was attempting to steal third, even though third base was occupied. B4 is thrown out at first on the play. RULING:  B4 did not reach first safely, so the coach has the option of taking the play or the penalty. If he takes the penalty, B4 is awarded first. R2 is awarded third because he was attempting to steal on the pitch, and R3 is forced to advance to home.

[Senor Azul]

No, Federation does not agree with the OBR interpretation on this play. Here are the official interpretations of both taken from the 2014 edition of the Baseball Rule Differences by Carl Childress (p. 189):

Fed: Even if the runner stealing is trying for an occupied base where the runner is NOT attempting to advance, if the penalty for catcher’s obstruction is enforced, the stealing runner is still allowed to keep the new base, forcing the previously occupying runner also to advance. Hopkins

OBR:  If the penalty for catcher’s interference is enforced, runners who were attempting a legitimate steal on the play will be awarded the base they were attempting to take. A “legitimate steal” attempt does not include a play situation where one runner is attempting to steal a base already occupied by another runner if that other runner is not attempting to steal as well. Wendelstedt

According to the BRD, the NCAA agrees with the OBR interpretation.

[Forest Ump]

Reason Number 263 why Fed rules suck..

[maven]

Yeah, I'm not usually a hater, but rewarding the offense for dumb base running is ... dumb.

Edited to add: it's dumb, but not without a customary FED rationale. The CO rule advances runners if forced (by the BR) or stealing. They'd have to add an exception to omit a runner who is stealing stupidly, and they try to minimize exceptions.

And since this particular exception — how often have you seen CO AND a stupid stealing at once — happens so infrequently, it's probably not worth bothering about.

Edited January 6, 2016 by maven

[Richvee]

Yeah, I'm not usually a hater, but rewarding the offense for dumb base running is ... dumb.

Well put.

I must admit, I need to read through the casebook again this winter.

[NavyChiefBlue]

Thanks for the help guys. I did get the question wrong, but when I reviewed the specific references for the rule, it still didn't make sense. With the addition of the statement from the case book, it helps. But like some of you have said, it ends up being another reason (#263) that FED is screwed up.

 

[Senor Azul]

You're welcome! Glad to help.

[Dbellyflop]

is this FED?

OBR the award is just Batter to 1B. and other runners advanced if forced.

at no time is R2 or R3 forced....

The award is B to 1B. all other runners back to TOP base..

[Jimurray]

is this FED?

OBR the award is just Batter to 1B. and other runners advanced if forced.

at no time is R2 or R3 forced....

The award is B to 1B. all other runners back to TOP base..

Did you read the thread? 

[Dbellyflop]

I read the first 7 or 8 replies and then replied. Then went back and finished and saw in later posts that it was a FED question. OP didn't state. And I'm not familiar enough with FED yet. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jimurray]

I read the first 7 or 8 replies and then replied. Then went back and finished and saw in later posts that it was a FED question. OP didn't state. And I'm not familiar enough with FED yet. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Did you pick up from the OP whether the runner stealing was a legitimate steal and should be awarded 3B and force R3 home?

[Dbellyflop]

Yes but I'm not familiar with FED. 

OBR:  If the penalty for catcher’s interference is enforced, runners who were attempting a legitimate steal on the play will be awarded the base they were attempting to take. A “legitimate steal” attempt does not include a play situation where one runner is attempting to steal a base already occupied by another runner if that other runner is not attempting to steal as well. Wendelstedt

 

According to the BRD, the NCAA agrees with the OBR interpretation.

6.08(c) The catcher or any fielder interferes with him. If a play follows the interference, the manager of the offense may advise the plate umpire that he elects to decline the interference penalty and accept the play. Such election shall be made immediately at the end of the play. However, if the batter reaches first base on a hit, an error, a base on balls, a hit batsman, or otherwise, and all other runners advance at least one base, the play proceeds without reference to the interference. Rule 6.08(c) Comment: If catcher’s interference is called with a play in progress the umpire will allow the play to continue because the manager may elect to take the play. If the batter-runner missed first base, or a runner misses his next base, he shall be considered as having reached the base, as stated in Note of Rule 7.04 (d).

Examples of plays the manager might elect to take:

1. Runner on third, one out, batter hits fly ball to the outfield on which the runner scores but catcher’s interference was called. The offensive manager may elect to take the run and have batter called out or have runner remain at third and batter awarded first base.

2. Runner on second base. Catcher interferes with batter as he bunts ball fairly sending runner to third base. The manager may rather have runner on third base with an out on the play than have runners on second and first. If a runner is trying to score by a steal or squeeze from third base, note the additional penalty set forth in Rule 7.07

 

7.07 If, with a runner on third base and trying to score by means of a squeeze play or a steal, the catcher or any other fielder steps on, or in front of home base without possession of the ball, or touches the batter or his bat, the pitcher shall be charged with a balk, the batter shall be awarded first base on the interference and the ball is dead.

 

But, I don't see where a runner attempting a steal is allowed to take the base he was going to if the manager accepts the interference. Except for 7.07, and the runner scores because of a balk and the batter is awarded 1B on the interference. 

Or is this the interpretation by Childress? And if there was only R2, and he was attempting to steal, is this how it should be awarded? Not return the runner to second?

add..... I have ben accused of reading the Rule Book too literally.....

Edited January 7, 2016 by Dbellyflop
add comment, Grammar.

[noumpere]

 

But, I don't see where a runner attempting a steal is allowed to take the base he was going to if the manager accepts the interference.

Old rule 7.04(d):

 

(d) While he is attempting to steal a base, the batter is interfered with by the catcher or

any other fielder.

[maven]

Old rule 7.04(d):

 

(d) While he is attempting to steal a base, the batter is interfered with by the catcher or

any other fielder.

And new rule 5.06(b)(3)(D); in the online PDF edition it's p. 27.

No change.

[Dbellyflop]

Thanks. never put that together....