NCAA FPSR Going in Standing directly to the Base

[johnnyg08]

Did the NCAA issue a clarification to it's FPSR stance on going in standing directly to 2B? 

I saw one today that wasn't called...just wondering if it was a miss or a new interpretation was issued? 

[Senor Azul]

The 2019-2020 College Baseball Study Guide by George Demetriou says the following (on pp. 84-85) about a runner who comes in standing up on a FPSR—

If a runner goes into a base standing up and does not make contact or alter the play of the defensive player, interference shall not be called. (8-4a)

Do you have video of the play? If not, do you remember if there was any actual interference on the play? Otherwise, perhaps we can try to contact Mr. Demetriou to get him to explain.

[johnnyg08]

10 minutes ago, Senor Azul said:

The 2019-2020 College Baseball Study Guide by George Demetriou says the following (on pp. 84-85) about a runner who comes in standing up on a FPSR—

If a runner goes into a base standing up and does not make contact or alter the play of the defensive player, interference shall not be called. (8-4a)

Do you have video of the play? If not, do you remember if there was any actual interference on the play? Otherwise, perhaps we can try to contact Mr. Demetriou to get him to explain.

I think this violates the "must slide in the vicinity of the base" provision that was put into the rule book this year. 

The runner does not slide or peel/veer away, but goes in standing. 

I'll post the video. 

[SleptTilNoonLOL]

I struggle with this in the FED games I do. I get alot of force plays at second base where the runner is out by 1-2 steps, and should absolutely be sliding, but goes standing directly into the base and the fielder catches the ball and moves out of the way. There is no contact, and no throw because there is no play on the BR. It's such bad baseball and I feel like they are violating the spirit of the rule by not sliding, but I dont think the rule supports me calling them out for not running the bases the way they "should". 

[Replacematt]

35 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

I think this violates the "must slide in the vicinity of the base" provision that was put into the rule book this year. 

The runner does not slide or peel/veer away, but goes in standing. 

I'll post the video. 

The exception that the interpretation follows still applies to that clause. The reason that is in there is to define where on the field FPSR can occur, not to make it more stringent on the runner.

[johnnyg08]

1 hour ago, SleptTilNoonLOL said:

I struggle with this in the FED games I do. I get alot of force plays at second base where the runner is out by 1-2 steps, and should absolutely be sliding, but goes standing directly into the base and the fielder catches the ball and moves out of the way. There is no contact, and no throw because there is no play on the BR. It's such bad baseball and I feel like they are violating the spirit of the rule by not sliding, but I dont think the rule supports me calling them out for not running the bases the way they "should". 

Couldn't agree more..there's a very good discussion about the NFHS version of this over in the Fed section of umpire-empire. Check it out! 

[Replacematt]

Coincidentally just posted. While it doesn't clear up everything, it adds to this discussion.

[johnnyg08]

I don't have a problem w/ no interference in plays like this. 

The ones in question are clearly in the vicinity of the base. 

 

[Thunderheads]

14 hours ago, Senor Azul said:

The 2019-2020 College Baseball Study Guide by George Demetriou says the following (on pp. 84-85) about a runner who comes in standing up on a FPSR—

If a runner goes into a base standing up and does not make contact or alter the play of the defensive player, interference shall not be called. (8-4a)

Do you have video of the play? If not, do you remember if there was any actual interference on the play? Otherwise, perhaps we can try to contact Mr. Demetriou to get him to explain.

 

14 hours ago, johnnyg08 said:

I think this violates the "must slide in the vicinity of the base" provision that was put into the rule book this year. 

The runner does not slide or peel/veer away, but goes in standing. 

I'll post the video. 

Well, ...what @Senor Azul posted is from 2019-2020.  What @johnnyg08 is talking about was just added this year, so it looks as though there was a change?

[Replacematt]

1 minute ago, Thunderheads said:

 

Well, ...what @Senor Azul posted is from 2019-2020.  What @johnnyg08 is talking about was just added this year, so it looks as though there was a change?

That goes back to what I said above. The change in the wording ("in the vicinity of the base") is intended to limit FPSR's applicability to that area, not to require anything that wasn't required before. The interpretation is still valid as the exception it is based on is still an exception under the current rule.

[johnnyg08]

Okay, here's the play:

 

[Thunderheads]

Well,...it doesn't look like it was called, and based on what I can see in the video, F6 holds onto the ball, but didn't look like it was because of R1. Again, hard to tell.

With NFHS being more stringent, I say you could get this one in HS, but I'm not 100% sure for NCAA

Sent from my SM-A426U using Tapatalk

[Richvee]

7 hours ago, Thunderheads said:

Well,...it doesn't look like it was called, and based on what I can see in the video, F6 holds onto the ball, but didn't look like it was because of R1. Again, hard to tell.

With NFHS being more stringent, I say you could get this one in HS, but I'm not 100% sure for NCAA

Sent from my SM-A426U using Tapatalk
 

I don’t see R1 altering f6’s play. Hard to see, but if R1 hit F6’s arm….easy call. But here, it looks like R1 was not in the way of f6 and the only reason he didn’t throw was because he had no shot at BR.  

[noumpere]

It looks to me (but it's tough form the angle) that F6 went to his left -- so R1 going straight to the base is legal -- it's the same as "running away from the fielder."  If F6 stays at the base, then running into the base is illegal.

[UmpireFever]

I feel like a few might be over thinking the video IMO and the rule in general.

Was it a FORCE PLAY? Yes.

Was he in the VICINITY of the base? Yes.

Did he SLIDE DIRECTLY INTO THE BAG/VEER OFF or GIVE HIMSELF UP(away from the fielder)? No.

Does the fact the BR would have been safe/out matter? NO.

Is the spirit of the rule to PROMOTE SAFETY? Yes.

[Replacematt]

On 3/29/2022 at 1:55 PM, UmpireFever said:

I feel like a few might be over thinking the video IMO and the rule in general.

Was it a FORCE PLAY? Yes.

Was he in the VICINITY of the base? Yes.

Did he SLIDE DIRECTLY INTO THE BAG/VEER OFF or GIVE HIMSELF UP(away from the fielder)? No.

Does the fact the BR would have been safe/out matter? NO.

Is the spirit of the rule to PROMOTE SAFETY? Yes.

Are you forgetting about clause (c) in the rule? I think so.

[UmpireFever]

25 minutes ago, Matt said:

Are you forgetting about clause (c) in the rule? I think so.

Clause C pretty much states everything I just mentioned that pertained to this play. 

[Replacematt]

2 minutes ago, UmpireFever said:

Clause C pretty much states everything I just mentioned that pertained to this play. 

No, it doesn't. Can you tell me which part of (c) pertains to this? Because none of them do.

[UmpireFever]

8 minutes ago, Matt said:

No, it doesn't. Can you tell me which part of (c) pertains to this? Because none of them do.

You’re fright. C does not. C defines other actions that support clause A. 

[Replacematt]

Just now, UmpireFever said:

You’re fright. C does not. C defines other actions that support clause A. 

I think you have it backwards.

C tells us when to enforce it. Otherwise R1 running through the bag five seconds after the play and with the infielder ten feet away is interference.

[UmpireFever]

 

[Replacematt]

1 minute ago, UmpireFever said:

 

Substantively different from the clip in question.

[UmpireFever]

“Otherwise R1 running through the bag five seconds after the play and with the infielder ten feet away is interference.”

 

F6 is still in possession of the ball. Are we watching the same video? 
 

[Replacematt]

4 minutes ago, UmpireFever said:

“Otherwise R1 running through the bag five seconds after the play and with the infielder ten feet away is interference.”

 

F6 is still in possession of the ball. Are we watching the same video? 
 

I was talking hypothetically. JFC.

This is not FPSR as he was not running at the fielder.

[UmpireFever]

If you say so. LOL