Jump to content

Runner hit by ball when very close to foul territory


Tog Gee

Recommended Posts

I was chatting with my team and we came up with this interesting scenario. I coach my players as R3s to lead off in foul territory.

What if R3 is hit by this batted ball on the toe? R3 is completely in foul territory and the foot print (black) is an inch off the line. (scale is off)    I got R3 OUT and batter to first.

foul.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Lou B said:

In your drawing the ball is in fair territory when it hits the runner's foot.  You are correct, R3 is out and the batter is awarded first base.

But the runner was not hit in fair territory. I think it would be a live ball just as the weird case of a batted ball hitting 3rd base and deflecting into R3 in foul territory.

"5.09(b)(7)  He is touched by a fair ball in fair territory before the ball has gone through, or by, an infielder and no other infielder has a chance to make a play on the ball. The ball is dead and no runner may score, nor runners advance, except runners forced to advance. EXCEPTION: If a runner is touching his base when touched by an Infield Fly, he is not out, although the batter is out;"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GiantEngineer said:

You have to determine where the ball was when it hit the runner. If it is foul, it's just a foul ball. It it's fair, then it is an out (with exception for both). 

Same thing applies if the runner is straddling the line.

You also have to determine where the runner was when hit. The OP is a fair ball due to touching the person of a player while over fair territory. But the runner was not touched in fair territory so it's a live ball.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, GiantEngineer said:

@Jimurray I think we are saying the same thing. It's the status/position of the ball that matters, not the runner because the ball has a width and can hit someone not directly touching fair territory.

No I'm saying your post is incorrect. The status of the ball matters and where, on the field, it contacted the runner matters. The OP is a fair ball but the contact was not in fair territory. Live ball.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dang, honestly thought this one might be a softball. Figuratively.

Just realized I didn't specify any rule set.

NFHS:

(Runner is out when) is contacted by a fair batted ball before it touches an infielder, or after it passes any infielder, except the pitcher, and the umpire is convinced that another infielder has a play. (5-1-1f, 6-1-5)
 

Perhaps NFHS doesn't care if the runner is fair or foul but OBR does?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Toggy said:

I was chatting with my team and we came up with this interesting scenario

Tangent: I love it. Creativity and problem solving (and having fun while doing it). Life skills.

#YouthSportsAren'tAboutSports

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Toggy said:

Dang, honestly thought this one might be a softball. Figuratively.

Just realized I didn't specify any rule set.

NFHS:

(Runner is out when) is contacted by a fair batted ball before it touches an infielder, or after it passes any infielder, except the pitcher, and the umpire is convinced that another infielder has a play. (5-1-1f, 6-1-5)
 

Perhaps NFHS doesn't care if the runner is fair or foul but OBR does?

 

31 minutes ago, GiantEngineer said:

That's possibly where I was getting confused. Hopefully someone can find a case play. 

NFHS rules the same as OBR but we need an interp to confirm it:

2010

SITUATION 4: R1 is at third base and is taking his lead a few feet down the line in foul ground. B2 hits a sharp ground ball that hits third base and caroms off the base and (a) hits R1 accidentally, or (b) R1 intentionally moves so that he is hit by the fair ball. RULING: In (a), the ball remains live and in play. In (b), the ball is dead, R1 is out for his interference and other runner(s) are returned to the base they occupied at the time of the interference. B2 is awarded first base. (8-4-2k, 2-5-1e)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

NFHS rules the same as OBR but we need an interp to confirm it:

2010

SITUATION 4: R1 is at third base and is taking his lead a few feet down the line in foul ground. B2 hits a sharp ground ball that hits third base and caroms off the base and (a) hits R1 accidentally, or (b) R1 intentionally moves so that he is hit by the fair ball. RULING: In (a), the ball remains live and in play. In (b), the ball is dead, R1 is out for his interference and other runner(s) are returned to the base they occupied at the time of the interference. B2 is awarded first base. (8-4-2k, 2-5-1e)

Wow great find. If a fair ball accidentally hits a runner in foul territory, play on. (as always, intentional interference is clear)

Any chance that case play is regarding caroms off of a base only?

OBR rule is clear in wording regarding a fair ball hits a runner in fair territory ... whereas NFHS just says a fair ball hits a runner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ErichKeane said:

I read the 'fair ball in fair territory' to mean the BALL is a fair ball and the BALL is in fair territory.  So the position of the runner is irrelevant, as the BALL is in fair territory at the time.

Would your reading change if you also read when the ball becomes dead, my bold:

"5.06(c)(6) A fair ball touches a runner or an umpire on fair territory before it touches an infielder including the pitcher, or touches an umpire before it has passed an infielder other than the pitcher; runners advance, if forced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

Would your reading change if you also read when the ball becomes dead, my bold:

"5.06(c)(6) A fair ball touches a runner or an umpire on fair territory before it touches an infielder including the pitcher, or touches an umpire before it has passed an infielder other than the pitcher; runners advance, if forced.

Sorta, but also maybe not?  It seems like a weird inconsistency with the wording of the rules, and I'd love to see a case play here.  It seems the NFHS rule above is more clear about the ball's position is the important factor, this seems inconsistent between the two rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ErichKeane said:

Sorta, but also maybe not?  It seems like a weird inconsistency with the wording of the rules, and I'd love to see a case play here.  It seems the NFHS rule above is more clear about the ball's position is the important factor, this seems inconsistent between the two rules.

This caseplay seems to make it clear that the runner's and ball's location matters:

"5.1.1 SITUATION N: With R3 at third and F5 playing deep, B2 hits a ball that caroms off the base into foul territory where it touches R3. RULING: A runner who is hit by a batted fair ball in foul territory is not out and the ball remains live."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jimurray said:

This caseplay seems to make it clear that the runner's and ball's location matters:

"5.1.1 SITUATION N: With R3 at third and F5 playing deep, B2 hits a ball that caroms off the base into foul territory where it touches R3. RULING: A runner who is hit by a batted fair ball in foul territory is not out and the ball remains live."

Again, my 'english language' parser takes the state of the ball being important there.  Note it never states where R3 is other than as a consequence of where the ball is ('the BALL caromed into foul territory', and 'fair ball in foul territory'.),

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, ErichKeane said:

Again, my 'english language' parser takes the state of the ball being important there.  Note it never states where R3 is other than as a consequence of where the ball is ('the BALL caromed into foul territory', and 'fair ball in foul territory'.),

Are you quibbling with the wording of the play and/or ruling? What situation can you devise where the ruling would not apply? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jimurray said:

Are you quibbling with the wording of the play and/or ruling? What situation can you devise where the ruling would not apply? 

The wording is quite important here, as it is the entire point.  That case play confirms to me that the position of the ball is the important thing, not the runner.

 

OPs case of fair-ball-in-fair-territory, foul-runner is an out IMO.  5.06(c)6 is inconsistent with the rest of the rule.

That said, I don't think there is a way to make it really matter outside of that case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, ErichKeane said:

The wording is quite important here, as it is the entire point.  That case play confirms to me that the position of the ball is the important thing, not the runner.

 

OPs case of fair-ball-in-fair-territory, foul-runner is an out IMO.  5.06(c)6 is inconsistent with the rest of the rule.

That said, I don't think there is a way to make it really matter outside of that case.

I think I see how we should only consider the location of the touch. Isn't the OP's touch in foul territory. There are other "on" references in the OBR referring to an umpire or player touched by a batted ball besides 5.06(c)(6).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jimurray said:

I think I see how we should only consider the location of the touch. Isn't the OP's touch in foul territory. There are other "on" references in the OBR referring to an umpire or player touched by a batted ball besides 5.06(c)(6).

Perhaps?  The "on" version (and not 'in' or 'over') could mean that R3, standing in foul territory (so not ON fair territory), but leaning 'over'  gets hit by a fair ball just ends up being a live-ball/play-on, which I think is pretty messed up.  IMO, the position of the ball is what should matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, ErichKeane said:

Perhaps?  The "on" version (and not 'in' or 'over') could mean that R3, standing in foul territory (so not ON fair territory), but leaning 'over'  gets hit by a fair ball just ends up being a live-ball/play-on, which I think is pretty messed up.  IMO, the position of the ball is what should matter.

I agree. The location of the fair ball touching the runner determines whether it's live (location of touch foul) or dead (location of touch fair). Your messed up play would be interference by the rule, 5.09(b)(7).  He was touched by a fair ball in fair territory. But how do you say the OP is not a live ball? We do have some "in" and "on" conflicts but that is the nature of OBR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

I agree. The location of the fair ball touching the runner determines whether it's live (location of touch foul) or dead (location of touch fair). Your messed up play would be interference by the rule, 5.09(b)(7).  He was touched by a fair ball in fair territory. But how do you say the OP is not a live ball? We do have some "in" and "on" conflicts but that is the nature of OBR.

From his drawing, the ball is fair at the time of contact, right?  AND is a fair ball.  So it is a fair ball in fair territory.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, ErichKeane said:

From his drawing, the ball is fair at the time of contact, right?  AND is a fair ball.  So it is a fair ball in fair territory.

 

 

It's also in foul territory where the contact is. He was not touched in fair territory. Can that rule be parsed both ways? He was not touched in fair territory.

It's not Interference:

"6.01(a)(11)  A fair ball touches him on fair territory before touching a fielder."

It's not dead:

"5.06(c)(6) A fair ball touches a runner or an umpire on fair territory before it touches an infielder including the pitcher, or touches an umpire before it has passed an infielder other than the pitcher; runners advance, if forced.

The batter does not become a runner entitled to 1B:

"5.05(b)(4)  A fair ball touches an umpire or a runner on fair territory before touching a fielder."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would claim that all of those are somewhat ambiguous as to what 'on fair territory' means.

BUT, it seems REALLY awkward to me that a ball, hit on the fly off R3 where the contact is made in foul territory(because the runner is not over the chalk), but the ball itself is in fair territory(because part of it is over the chalk) could be a 'play on' + fair ball.  I don't really see how I can make that call with a straight face.

I realize we're talking a balls-width in a position where this is basically all judgement calls, so we can avoid it by saying "oh, that ball was fair, none was over the chalk in my judgement" or "the contact was made over fair territory, ergo interference!" and never considering the middle case, but that too seems disingenuous.

However, the case where someone would notice/force us to make that call is:

R3, suicide squeeze.  Bunt is riding the chalk on the way foul.  R3 inadvertently (based on your case play, intent is required to make this a dead ball)steps and has the ball bounce off his foot, causing it to stay fair.  At that point, we tell the coach, "well the actual physical atoms that touched were foul even though the ball was fair, therefore this is nothing!".

Just sits wrong.

Link to comment
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...