Jump to content
  • 0

F6 & R1


Guest Burg Boy

Question

Guest Burg Boy

Fed:  R1, ground ball to F4 who throws to F6 who is on the bag.  R1 slides into and contacts F6 who is on the bag looking to turn a DP.

Slide is legal to this point, the momentum of R1 carries him past 2nd after the contact with F6, which causes a wild throw to first.  Legal because F6 was on the 

bag during initial contact or interference because R1 wound up past 2nd after contact?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

r

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
My understanding is that the contact has to occur beyond the bag to be illegal. 

As described in the OP, there is contact beyond the bag. Initial contact is not beyond the bag. I think this is a good question as I've had this happen a few times. I have not seen or heard any official interpretations to answer this question yet. Perhaps someone will post one here. In the meantime I've been calling interference on this. It's safer and cleaner. "Coach, I had contact beyond the bag". It gives the middle infielder one more place to go to avoid contact.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

The definition of an illegal slide makes it clear that if the initial contact with the fielder occurs when he is on the base, then subsequent contact is legal. 2-32-2c: "except at home plate, the runner goes beyond the base and then makes contact with or alters the play of the fielder."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
16 minutes ago, maven said:

The definition of an illegal slide makes it clear that if the initial contact with the fielder occurs when he is on the base, then subsequent contact is legal. 2-32-2c: "except at home plate, the runner goes beyond the base and then makes contact with or alters the play of the fielder."

Legal as long as the contact is not higher than the fielder's knee or a result of a kick or slash. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

What is an illegal slide? An illegal slide occurs when a runner uses a rolling, cross-body or pop-up slide into the fielder; the runner’s raised leg is higher than the fielder’s knee when the fielder is in a standing position; the runner goes beyond the base and makes contact with or alters the play of the fielder; the runner slashes or kicks the fielder with either leg; or the runner tries to injure the infielder. (Fed 2-32-1a-e).

Rule 8-4-2 reads: Any runner is out when he: (b) does not legally slide and causes illegal contact and/or legally alters the actions of a fielder in the immediate act of making a play, or on a force play, does not slide in a direct line between the bases. A runner may slide away from the fielder to avoid contact or alter the play of the fielder. Runners are never required to slide, but if a runner elects to slide, the slide must be legal.

http://www.umpire.org/writers/force.html

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
8 hours ago, BrianC14 said:

What is an illegal slide? An illegal slide occurs when a runner uses a rolling, cross-body or pop-up slide into the fielder; the runner’s raised leg is higher than the fielder’s knee when the fielder is in a standing position; the runner goes beyond the base and makes contact with or alters the play of the fielder; the runner slashes or kicks the fielder with either leg; or the runner tries to injure the infielder. (Fed 2-32-1a-e).

Rule 8-4-2 reads: Any runner is out when he: (b) does not legally slide and causes illegal contact and/or legally alters the actions of a fielder in the immediate act of making a play, or on a force play, does not slide in a direct line between the bases. A runner may slide away from the fielder to avoid contact or alter the play of the fielder. Runners are never required to slide, but if a runner elects to slide, the slide must be legal.

http://www.umpire.org/writers/force.html

The bolding in your quotation is misleading, as it misses the "subtle" logical connections involved. (The second instance also has "legally alters" when it should say "illegally alters".)

For example, a runner who slides legally AND alters the play of a fielder is guilty of nothing but a good slide. That's what we have in the OP: the slide is legal because contact with the fielder was initiated at the base.

The logic of 8-4-2b is "does not legally slide AND either [causes illegal contact or illegally alters the actions of a fielder]." The triggering event is an illegal slide, as that's what makes the contact or alteration of play illegal. But the illegal slide alone is not sufficient for an FPSR violation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
36 minutes ago, maven said:

The bolding in your quotation is misleading, as it misses the "subtle" logical connections involved. (The second instance also has "legally alters" when it should say "illegally alters".)

For example, a runner who slides legally AND alters the play of a fielder is guilty of nothing but a good slide. That's what we have in the OP: the slide is legal because contact with the fielder was initiated at the base.

The logic of 8-4-2b is "does not legally slide AND either [causes illegal contact or illegally alters the actions of a fielder]." The triggering event is an illegal slide, as that's what makes the contact or alteration of play illegal. But the illegal slide alone is not sufficient for an FPSR violation.

Key word is "or".   And please note the attribution at the end of my reply. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 hour ago, BrianC14 said:

Key word is "or".   And please note the attribution at the end of my reply. 

I don't know what "key" means here, but the main logical operator of the rule is "and," and the "or" is secondary. For INT, we need BOTH an illegal slide AND something else: either contact or altering play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
10 hours ago, BrianC14 said:

What is an illegal slide? An illegal slide occurs when a runner uses a rolling, cross-body or pop-up slide into the fielder; the runner’s raised leg is higher than the fielder’s knee when the fielder is in a standing position; the runner goes beyond the base and makes contact with or alters the play of the fielder; the runner slashes or kicks the fielder with either leg; or the runner tries to injure the infielder. (Fed 2-32-1a-e).

 

Wherever you copied this from (and I know the author) is missing a key word (it might NOT have been in the rule when written).

The correct wording is: c. the runner goes beyond the base and then makes contact with or alters the play of the fielder

I agree with Maven's parsing-- if the contact / alteration is not beyond the base, the play is legal (assuming no other parts of the rule were violated)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 hour ago, maven said:

I don't know what "key" means here, but the main logical operator of the rule is "and," and the "or" is secondary. For INT, we need BOTH an illegal slide AND something else: either contact or altering play.

Sticking with FED rules here, since that was what I posted.  

So consider the pop-up slide.   Illegal in Fed, doesn't typically take the runner beyond the bag, nor does it always result in contact.   But it could alter the play of the fielder.   I'm getting INT there, and B/R will be out.

Another scenario:   runner decides not to slide.  Fed rules don't require a slide.   Runner peels off, but  still alters the play of the fielder by whatever manner can be imagined.   I'm also getting INT there, and B/R wlll be out.   

The "or" is indeed the key word in 8-4-2(b) which reads:   (emphasis mine, and my comments in red);

b. does not legally slide and causes illegal contact and/or (meaning either of those scenarios is enough to rule upon) illegally alters the actions of a fielder in the immediate act of making a play, or on a force play, does not slide in a direct line between the bases; or

1. A runner may slide in a direction away from the fielder to avoid making ­contact or altering the play of the fielder.   The concept of this, as I read it, is to ensure that runners avoid making any contact on a fielder so as not to alter their play.   Note that the rule doesn't REQUIRE contact for INT to be called;  if R1 going into second ran straight at the fielder who had touched the base and then moved to one side, and then R1 began waving his arms like a wild man and in doing so causes the fielder to either air-mail his throw or prohibits making a throw.   Again, I'd have INT there and the B/R could be ruled out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 hour ago, noumpere said:

Wherever you copied this from (and I know the author) is missing a key word (it might NOT have been in the rule when written).

The correct wording is: c. the runner goes beyond the base and then makes contact with or alters the play of the fielder

I agree with Maven's parsing-- if the contact / alteration is not beyond the base, the play is legal (assuming no other parts of the rule were violated)

It's pretty obvious were I copied it from, since I provided the link to the site.  

So you're actually saying that if the contact or play altering takes place somewhere between 2B and 1B the play would be legal?   

Fed Case book ... unfortunately, this doesn't specify where the INT occurred, though at a minimum, we know there was an illegal slide, which is enough to satisfy one condition of calling the INT.  

8-4-2 SITUATION P:

R1 is on third and R2 is on first with no outs. B3 hits a ground ball to F4 who throws to F6 to force R2. R2 slides illegally, contacts F6 and interference is called by the umpire.

RULING: R2 is out. B3 is out, and R1 is returned to third.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

2.32.2 SITUATION B:  Again, this doesn't say anything about where contact may have taken place (if any) but it does point out altering the fielder's play.  

R1 is on third base and R2 is on first base with no outs. A ground ball is hit to F6, who throws to F4 at second base. R2 slides out of the base path in an attempt to prevent F4 from turning the double play.

RULING: Since R2 did not slide directly into second base, R2 is declared out, as well as the batter-runner. R1 returns to third base, the base occupied at the time of the pitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
39 minutes ago, BrianC14 said:

Sticking with FED rules here, since that was what I posted.  

So consider the pop-up slide.  

I thought we were only talking about "going beyond the base."  In fact, in my responses, i said "assuming no other parts of the rule were violated."  You seem to be confusing (or I am mis-reading) 2-32-2-c (going beyond the base) with 2-32-2a (pop up), b (raised leg), d (slash), e (attempt to injure) ,f (force play - direct line). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
8 minutes ago, noumpere said:

I thought we were only talking about "going beyond the base."  In fact, in my responses, i said "assuming no other parts of the rule were violated."  You seem to be confusing (or I am mis-reading) 2-32-2-c (going beyond the base) with 2-32-2a (pop up), b (raised leg), d (slash), e (attempt to injure) ,f (force play - direct line). 

It could be said that 2.23.2c is a bit at odds with 8-4-2(b), because of what the latter does not address (both in rule and case book).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Source:   https://osaabaseball.arbitersports.com/Groups/105989/Library/files/2014RulesPointsofEmphasis.pdf    (2014 NFHS Point of Emphasis document).

I realize this POE from 2014 has to do with malicious contact, but the overall tone / point of the article is summed up here:

"Runners should be instructed to slide or attempt to avoid making contact with any defensive player."

FED's approach has been to avoid contact (not just when it comes to MC) wherever it can be avoided.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

And this from Jaksa/Roder:

NFHS 8-4-2b:   A runner advancing on a force to a base where a play is being made must slide directly into the base or away from the fielder.  If he slides to the side of the base in the direction of the fielder and contacts the fielder or alters the play in any way, it is interference and an automatic double play, even if the double play was no longer possible.

 

NFHS 8-4-2b: A runner advancing on a force to a base where a play is being made must avoid a "pop-up slide"; such slide is considered intent to stand and block a fielder.  If a runner pops up after his slide and makes contact with a fielder during a force play, or alters the play in any way, it is interference and an automatic double play, even if the double play was no longer possible.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
2 minutes ago, mrumpiresir said:

It seems there is agreement that the FPSR was not violated.  Could not the subsequent contact beyond the base be considered interference by a retired runner? 

No. He was retired before the contact. His status doesn't change anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...