Jump to content
udbrky

Deflected ball meets F1/BR

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, udbrky said:

 

Saw this in the Fed Facebook group. Whoof.

I think we have obstruction in FED, BR awarded 1B. NCAA and OBR I would have interference on the BR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

I think we have obstruction in FED, BR awarded 1B. NCAA and OBR I would have interference on the BR.

That’s what I have.  I am assured by all responders that I’m wrong for NCAA and OBR. They claim that the fielder can not regain his protection once he has to chase the ball. Hiler said this was interference a couple of years ago but I haven’t been able to find the video yet because I haven’t had time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, grayhawk said:

That’s what I have.  I am assured by all responders that I’m wrong for NCAA and OBR. They claim that the fielder can not regain his protection once he has to chase the ball. Hiler said this was interference a couple of years ago but I haven’t been able to find the video yet because I haven’t had time. 

Can you give some clues and I'll research the video

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, udbrky said:

Can you give some clues and I'll research the video

 

I don’t remember if it was in a video bulletin or it’s own video. Regardless, we don’t even need it because it’s codified in NCAA:

2-51 A.R. 5 If a fielder chases after a deflected batted ball ahead of a runner’s arrival and is in the act of picking up the ball (fielding) when contact is made by an offensive player, interference is the call. If the fielder is chasing after the deflected batted ball and contact is made between the two players, obstruction should be the call.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Curious are there any rules that talk about fielding a ball with improper equipment.

 

IE ball cap or catchers mask

To me that ball was not "deflected" he kicked it.  Yes its deflected off his foot but he put a hockey move on it. 

Just curious if there is anything like rulings against not using a glove to field the ball.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Curious are there any rules that talk about fielding a ball with improper equipment.
 
IE ball cap or catchers mask
To me that ball was not "deflected" he kicked it.  Yes its deflected off his foot but he put a hockey move on it. 
Just curious if there is anything like rulings against not using a glove to field the ball.
 


Sure, there are rules against fielding a pitch, a thrown ball or a batted ball with detached equipment. Attempting to stop the ball with your foot is none of those. And kicking it as opposed to muffing it changes nothing on this play. Both are missed attempts at fielding the ball.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ArchAngel72 said:

Curious are there any rules that talk about fielding a ball with improper equipment.

 

IE ball cap or catchers mask

To me that ball was not "deflected" he kicked it.  Yes its deflected off his foot but he put a hockey move on it. 

Just curious if there is anything like rulings against not using a glove to field the ball.

 

For hats/mask, or throwing your glove at it, absolutely - that's detached equipment. Fielding bare handed or trying to/successfully kicking it are not illegal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found this in the Wendelstedt Umpire Manual.  I don't have the latest one, but I am unaware of any rules changes on this play over the last few years:

 

1sG4oMBtTbWyDRb0MhhNhg_thumb_15b7.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, grayhawk said:

I don’t remember if it was in a video bulletin or it’s own video. Regardless, we don’t even need it because it’s codified in NCAA:

2-51 A.R. 5 If a fielder chases after a deflected batted ball ahead of a runner’s arrival and is in the act of picking up the ball (fielding) when contact is made by an offensive player, interference is the call. If the fielder is chasing after the deflected batted ball and contact is made between the two players, obstruction should be the call.

IIRC (and, increasingly, I don't), the AR was added after a similar video from an NCAA game.  Way too many people read the rule literally as "if the initial fielder moves, he is not protected."  That makes no sense -- if *another* fielder can be protected then the original fielder can be "re-protected" if he's again in the act of fielding the ball (and not just chasing after it.

 

Much discussion on this and other boards, and the AR then showed up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, noumpere said:

IIRC (and, increasingly, I don't), the AR was added after a similar video from an NCAA game.  Way too many people read the rule literally as "if the initial fielder moves, he is not protected."  That makes no sense -- if *another* fielder can be protected then the original fielder can be "re-protected" if he's again in the act of fielding the ball (and not just chasing after it.

 

Much discussion on this and other boards, and the AR then showed up.

Exactly. Only Fed would be so ridiculous (which they are, of course).  The FB post was frustrating because people just ignore all evidence that doesn’t support their position. I posted the WUM reference there and there was not a single comment about it. Like I said, it’s an old reference and it’s possible that Wendelstedt has changed his interpretation since then, but to ignore it is simply confirmation bias. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know...if I were to simply ignore any and all knowledge of the rules, and just look at the spirit of the game, this is interference.

The b/r interferes with a fielder in the act of fielding a batted ball, deflected or not.

People get all hot and bothered by interpretations and misinterpretations, and fundamentalist translations, and want to look for reasons to cleverly find an exception.   And some of the "clarifications" don't help matters.

 

If the ball had hit the pitcher and it was F3 who got hit by the batter, as F3 attempted to field it, it would be interference.  People get confused by this "step and a reach thing" and take it literally...yes, at one point the ball did get outside a step and a reach...and if the batter had hit F1 at that time it would be OBS...but at the time of contact F1 was back into the act of fielding the ball.

I'd frankly be curious to see what bonehead interpretation/wording makes this OBS in FED.....Edit...I found it...all I can say is...Jesus Christ.

Schoolyard and sandlot rules, and common sense, this is INT all day long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

You know...if I were to simply ignore any and all knowledge of the rules, and just look at the spirit of the game, this is interference.

The b/r interferes with a fielder in the act of fielding a batted ball, deflected or not.

People get all hot and bothered by interpretations and misinterpretations, and fundamentalist translations, and want to look for reasons to cleverly find an exception.   And some of the "clarifications" don't help matters.

 

If the ball had hit the pitcher and it was F3 who got hit by the batter, as F3 attempted to field it, it would be interference.  People get confused by this "step and a reach thing" and take it literally...yes, at one point the ball did get outside a step and a reach...and if the batter had hit F1 at that time it would be OBS...but at the time of contact F1 was back into the act of fielding the ball.

I'd frankly be curious to see what bonehead interpretation/wording makes this OBS in FED.....Edit...I found it...all I can say is...Jesus Christ.

Schoolyard and sandlot rules, and common sense, this is INT all day long.

Can you post that interp/reference? I'm gonna be starting HS ball next year, and I've got a lot of stuff to learn about FED. I don't think much of it will be favorable (dead ball balks??? Why? It's really not that hard a rule.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In OBR, the fielder is protected any time he is making a play on the ball.  He’s not protected recovering on an error, but regains protection once he is again in the act of fielding.

Fed makes the logical argument “Why protect a fielder who made an error causing the ball to enter the runner’s path, and is now chasing the ball into the runner’s path?”

I can see the logic in both versions.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, The Man in Blue said:

In OBR, the fielder is protected any time he is making a play on the ball.  He’s not protected recovering on an error, but regains protection once he is again in the act of fielding.

Fed makes the logical argument “Why protect a fielder who made an error causing the ball to enter the runner’s path, and is now chasing the ball into the runner’s path?”

I can see the logic in both versions.

 

Me too, at the FED level I call it like they want. At the NCAA level I call it like they want. At the MLB/OBR level I call it like they want, which would only be INDY ball or lower but might still be debatable if you don't ascribe to the Wendelstedt School. I think my first post after the OP summarized everything that was posted afterwood other than dealing with @grayhawk's lament about facebook umpire sites which he should not have participated in. But I too have succumbed to facebook also on a pretty good site but you cannot keep the train on the rails on facebook. Don't go there for baseball rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

In OBR, the fielder is protected any time he is making a play on the ball.  He’s not protected recovering on an error, but regains protection once he is again in the act of fielding.

Fed makes the logical argument “Why protect a fielder who made an error causing the ball to enter the runner’s path, and is now chasing the ball into the runner’s path?”

I can see the logic in both versions.

 

Case in point - F1 in the video did not make an error...it deflected off him and it just happened to be him who was able to get to the ball and make a play on it....if F3 had made the play on the deflection (error or not) he would be protected.  FED's position here is not logical, it's silly.

 

10 hours ago, Biscuit said:

Can you post that interp/reference? I'm gonna be starting HS ball next year, and I've got a lot of stuff to learn about FED. I don't think much of it will be favorable (dead ball balks??? Why? It's really not that hard a rule.)

I'm just going by the rule in 4-2-g - I'm assuming this is why FED wants this play to be OBS, not INT.

g. intentionally interferes with a throw or a thrown ball; or he hinders a fielder on his initial attempt to field a batted ball. A fielder is not protected, except from intentional contact if he misplays the ball and has to move from his original location;

Now, I guess if you want to get into the literal fundamental literal definition of those words...did F1 "misplay" the ball?    The impetus of the ball's movement is still the bat, and this would never be called an error.  But, even without that, it's no longer his initial attempt.

 

I think it would be a different story, even in OBR, if the ball had come to a stop, and then the fielder accidentally kicked it into to runner's path, and then tried to field it to make the throw, because it would no longer be a "batted" ball.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ehhh ... @beerguy55I agree with your point about a deflected ball ... it may not necessarily be an initial play.  However, in the video it was a play IMO ... the pitcher kicked his foot out at the ball.  Maybe not an error, but a conscious movement to get the ball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Biscuit, if you want to read for yourself the rule that Mr. beerguy55 cited the proper citation is 2019 NFHS rule 8-4-2g.

Also, the rules and interpretations use the words misplay and deflect in specific ways—they are two different actions. Just check out the scorekeeping rules under the heading of Errors in the OBR. Synonyms used for the word misplay are fumble, muff, mechanical misplay, and physical misplay.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   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...