Out, return runner or other

[Guest Nick]

HS Fed Rules. Bases empty. Ball 4 is a WP to the back stop. F2 leisurely pursues escaped pitch and B/R notices. B/R sprints to 1b rounds and begins heading to 2b. F2 now gets in a hurry. Meanwhile on deck batter had begun his walk to batter’s box immediately after ball 4 called. On deck batter has one foot in box and is in line with F2 and 2b, causing F2 to alter his throw. Interference? If yes is B\R out or is B/R returned to 1b? Could on deck batter be called out?

[beerguy55]

5 hours ago, maven said:

 

People—and I reluctantly include umpires among them—sometimes forget that offense is also a team sport.

No one's forgetting it.  The fact is, if F2 hustles, B/R just stays at first, and ODB is never in the way.  ODB was in the way as a direct result of F2 being lazy/inattentive - basically, ODB made the same mistake F2 did - they didn't pay attention and/or assumed B/R would just stop at first and the play was over.    The rule punishes one team and rewards the other.

B/R's decision to attempt to advance had nothing to do with anything the ODB did - ie. he was't the reason for the advance.  F2 put himself in a situation/position to be interfered.

Calling B/R out here is correct, and it sucks. If there was a provision to return B/R to first I would take it (I know there isn't one).   

16 hours ago, Richvee said:

AT first read I pictured a one of those tight cages around the plate. Then I thought, if the it's a short cage,  Just how slow was F2 moving that BR got around 1B and towards 2nd??

Other possibility is F2 picks up the ball at the standard deep backstop, and runs several steps (for any number of reasons) almost back to home plate before he throws.   This is also another way that F2 can put  himself in a position to be interfered.   But I don't think the rules care if the defending players put themselves in that position - intentionally or not.

[CJK]

23 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

ODB was in the way as a direct result of F2 being lazy/inattentive

I'll disagree.  ODB was in the way as a direct result of his/her own inattentiveness.  Lazy F2 provided an opportunity for the B/R to advance, every opportunity for live ball advancement carries the possibility of interference, and the onus is on the offensive players to avoid it.  The rules don't require F2 to hustle or be aware; they don't require B/R and 1BC to be alert and take advantage of the situation; they do require ODB to stay out of the way.

The unfortunate part of the situation (and the one that I think people are rightfully lamenting) is that the player most directly affected by the penalty is the only one who was doing the "right" thing.  But like a kick returner whose teammate pushes an inconsequential defender in the back or a big man who gets too aggressive just when a teammate pulls the trigger on a 3 pointer, that's how team sports work sometimes.  The human part of us recognizes that it feels "unfair" to that player, but the official in us knows that the rules are the rules, and our job is to enforce them.

[beerguy55]

3 minutes ago, CJK said:

I'll disagree.  ODB was in the way as a direct result of his/her own inattentiveness.  Lazy F2 provided an opportunity for the B/R to advance, every opportunity for live ball advancement carries the possibility of interference, and the onus is on the offensive players to avoid it.  The rules don't require F2 to hustle or be aware; they don't require B/R and 1BC to be alert and take advantage of the situation; they do require ODB to stay out of the way.

The unfortunate part of the situation (and the one that I think people are rightfully lamenting) is that the player most directly affected by the penalty is the only one who was doing the "right" thing.  But like a kick returner whose teammate pushes an inconsequential defender in the back or a big man who gets too aggressive just when a teammate pulls the trigger on a 3 pointer, that's how team sports work sometimes.  The human part of us recognizes that it feels "unfair" to that player, but the official in us knows that the rules are the rules, and our job is to enforce them.

Which is why I say the ruling is correct.   Both players were inattentive - as you say, the rules only require one of them to be attentive.   I will clarify one thing - though it may not matter to you.  I am not lamenting the fairness to any one player, but to the team.  One team is rewarded for its player's inattentiveness, the other team is punished for its player's inattentiveness.

[umpstu]

8 hours ago, maven said:

Do you feel that bad every time an infielder doesn't charge a batted ball hard enough; or every time an outfielder takes a bad route to a fly ball, allowing R3 to tag and score? "It sucks that we can't get an out, but least his teammate was in a good position to retire a runner!"

People—and I reluctantly include umpires among them—sometimes forget that offense is also a team sport.

Do you ever wish, that when little Johhny's mother is hollering at you, that you could turn around and let her know how good her son's ability actually is?  And Aaron Judge is leading off? Really?

[umpstu]

5 hours ago, WilsonFlyer said:

We'd probably be amazed at how many catchers at lower levels that don't realize that's a live-ball situation even with nobody on also. Well, at least not until it's too late like in the situation outlined above. Lots of people take walks very "casually" and shouldn't. Lots can go wrong as above demonstrates.

Certainly not on us. Just furthering the point to the question with regards to the runner attempting 2B and why.

Or how many times an umpire just hands a ball to the catcher in a situation like this?  Even at the MLB level.

[LRZ]

PU: "Ball four."

DC: "Time, Blue."

PU: "When the BR reaches first."

[CJK]

2 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

One team is rewarded for its player's inattentiveness, the other team is punished for its player's inattentiveness.

Still no.  The team is penalized specifically for not following the rules.  Inattentiveness alone is not prevented by rule.  Interference is.

 

[beerguy55]

1 hour ago, CJK said:

Still no.  The team is penalized specifically for not following the rules.  Inattentiveness alone is not prevented by rule.  Interference is.

 

JFC - are you doing it on purpose?  I know that the team is "literally" being penalized for breaking the rules.  It doesn't change the practical meaning of the application of said rule.

[ElkOil]

10 hours ago, maven said:

People—and I reluctantly include umpires among them—sometimes forget that offense is also a team sport.

I don't know about this. I can be pretty offensive all by myself.

[maven]

3 hours ago, umpstu said:

Do you ever wish, that when little Johhny's mother is hollering at you, that you could turn around and let her know how good her son's ability actually is?

I'm pretty sure that's not why she's hollering at me.

[Rich Ives]

On 3/22/2018 at 2:51 PM, beerguy55 said:

You are not a batter until you are entitled to occupy the batter's box.  That entitlement does not occur until the previous play is over.   At the beginning of an inning you are not a "batter" until the pitcher warmup is over, or some point shortly thereafter when you are entitled to occupy the batter's box.

 

 

Where does it say that?  If he isn't the batter who is? The batter is the offensive player who takes his position in the batter's box. Who is that player? Must be someone. Probably the player who follows the player who last completed his AB. Guess who that is? 

[LRZ]

Fed defines "batter" as "the player ...  who is entitled to occupy either of the two batters’ boxes...." This would seem to support Rich's position.

But is that player "entitled" to occupy the batter box until the previous play ends? Silence on this question.

In OBR, a batter is "an offensive player who takes his position in the batter’s box." This would seem to support beerguy's argument that the ODB becomes the "batter" when he steps into the box--i.e, when he takes his position--not before.

Seems like a lacuna in the rules, where they do not specifically address a point that has never become an issue.

By the way, I got up to 98 angels dancing on the head of that pin, but I'm not finished counting yet.

[maven]

2 hours ago, LRZ said:

By the way, I got up to 98 angels dancing on the head of that pin, but I'm not finished counting yet.

According to certain medieval philosophers who shall remain nameless, you have a LONG way to go. Just ask noumpere.

[LRZ]

1 hour ago, maven said:

According to certain medieval philosophers who shall remain nameless, you have a LONG way to go. Just ask noumpere.

I'm still counting and have a lot of time, while I wait for the snow to melt....

[beerguy55]

On 3/25/2018 at 11:42 AM, Rich Ives said:

Where does it say that?  If he isn't the batter who is? The batter is the offensive player who takes his position in the batter's box. Who is that player? Must be someone. Probably the player who follows the player who last completed his AB. Guess who that is? 

He's not a batter until he either takes his position in the batter's box, or when he is entitled to do so, depending on the rule set.    Until that point he is simply "on deck", which really isn't an official position as literally any member of the team who is not on base or at the plate can be there.   He does not necessarily become a batter the instant the previous batter becomes a runner, or gets out.   

You ask "if he isn't the batter, who is?"  Simple...nobody.  For a few seconds at a time, after the batter puts the ball in play, but before the play ends, there is no batter, and there is simply an offensive team member standing in or near the on deck circle waiting until he is allowed to bat. 

 

 

23 hours ago, LRZ said:

But is that player "entitled" to occupy the batter box until the previous play ends? Silence on this question.

It can be implied, or deduced, in some ways by practical application, in others by common sense.  If the previous batter puts the ball in play - let's say a ground ball to the outfielder with R2 trying to score....the ODB is not "entitled" to enter the batter's box and become a batter, simply because the previous batter is now a runner.   He is in fact required to stay out of the way,  beyond getting in position to help R2 determine if he should slide or not.  He is not entitled to go up to the batter's box, start sweeping the box, and plant his feet...and even if he did and managed not to interfere with F2, he wouldn't be a "batter", not in FED anyway.

 

23 hours ago, LRZ said:

Seems like a lacuna in the rules, where they do not specifically address a point that has never become an issue.

This is where it could be an issue.  The penalty for an illegal bat is only applied to batters, specifically upon entering the box.   Non-batters can hold illegal bats.  ODB's can warm up with illegal bats (yes, I've seen them removed in this scenario, but nobody is called out, or ejected)  So, if in the example above, with the previous play still going on, if the ODB sauntered over to and then entered the batter's box with an illegal bat, would you call him out, for entering the box with an illegal bat?    Likewise at the beginning of an inning before, or during, the pitcher warm up - would you call him out for entering the batter's box with an illegal bat?  IMO, he's not a batter yet as he's not entitled to enter the box.   In OBR, I suppose you could rule him as a batter because he took his position in the box, whether he was entitled or not.  But even in OBR the "entitled" piece is implied.  If there are two guys in the box, only one can be a batter....only one of them is entitled to be a batter...they're not both batters simply because they both chose to take their position in the box.  (eg. during a sub, new player comes in and enters RHB box, and old player is a dick and stays in LHB box - this is going on while coach is talking to PU about the sub details)