FPSR Disagreement

[834k3r]

Had this situation last night and would like others' thoughts.

FED. R1/R2, 1 out. I'm in C. Ground ball to F5, who throws to F6 covering 2B; the throw easily beats R1. F6 takes the ball on the 3B side of 2B, and makes no attempt at a throw to 1B--not even a cocking of his arm. R1 did not move toward F6, nor did he slide.

DTHC (who has a reputation for complaining for calls) screams for INT, which I don't give. PU (senior guy) calls time and we meet in the infield. PU says it doesn't matter if F6 didn't attempt a play, so he's going to call the B/R out at 1B for the INT.

Question 1:  Who's call is the INT? PU is supposed to help clean up the play at 2B, but whose call is it for INT?

Question 2:  I understand this is HTBT, but would you have called INT?

Edited April 19 by 834k3r
Added ruleset

[JSam21]

Are we talking NFHS or NCAA?

[834k3r]

1 minute ago, JSam21 said:

Are we talking NFHS or NCAA?

Sorry--FED.

[JSam21]

3 minutes ago, 834k3r said:

Sorry--FED.

Then yes, this is a violation of the FPSR. The runner either needs to slide directly into the base, or slide/run in a direction away from the defender. There is a new case play that was published this year that states this. They can no longer come directly into the base standing up. 

The defender's attempt or ability to turn the double play has no bearing on the enforcement of the rule. 

I have no issues with your PU coming to you as this was a misapplication of the rules.

[Tborze]

2 minutes ago, 834k3r said:

Sorry--FED.

What did R1 INT with?

[JSam21]

2 minutes ago, Tborze said:

What did R1 INT with?

The FPSR isn't an interference rule, it is a safety rule. There are requirements for a runner on force plays within sliding distance from the base. This runner didn't meet those requirements, so they are in violation. 

 

[Velho]

Not my area of expertise (I don't currently do HS) but does the fact there was judged to be no DP attempt have a bearing? The OP does not meet the 2024 case play Situation Y.

EDIT: Note for anyone just reading the thumbnail below. The boxed "choose to slide" is a typo. It should read "choose NOT to slide".

 

[Tborze]

4 minutes ago, JSam21 said:

The FPSR isn't an interference rule, it is a safety rule. There are requirements for a runner on force plays within sliding distance from the base. This runner didn't meet those requirements, so they are in violation. 

 

Going into the base standing up is not in and of itself a violation of the rule. 
 

I guess FED still hasn’t clarified this enough yet!  

[JSam21]

19 minutes ago, Velho said:

Not my area of expertise (I don't currently do HS) but does the fact there was judged to be no DP attempt have a bearing? The OP does not meet the 2024 case play Situation Y.

 

 

What is a play? Attempting to retire a runner correct? Aren't they making a play on R1?

[JSam21]

3 minutes ago, Tborze said:

Going into the base standing up is not in and of itself a violation of the rule. 
 

I guess FED still hasn’t clarified this enough yet!  

It is if there is a play being attempted and a play was being made on R1.

[Tborze]

36 minutes ago, 834k3r said:

Had this situation last night and would like others' thoughts.

FED. R1/R2, 1 out. I'm in C. Ground ball to F5, who throws to F6 covering 2B; the throw easily beats R1. F6 takes the ball on the 3B side of 2B, and makes no attempt at a throw to 1B--not even a cocking of his arm. R1 did not move toward F6, nor did he slide.

DTHC (who has a reputation for complaining for calls) screams for INT, which I don't give. PU (senior guy) calls time and we meet in the infield. PU says it doesn't matter if F6 didn't attempt a play, so he's going to call the B/R out at 1B for the INT.

Question 1:  Who's call is the INT? PU is supposed to help clean up the play at 2B, but whose call is it for INT?

Question 2:  I understand this is HTBT, but would you have called INT?

Q1.  Your call in this situation.  
Q2.  No.  Not as described.  

[Jimurray]

26 minutes ago, JSam21 said:

It is if there is a play being attempted and a play was being made on R1.

If the pivot man clears the base as they usually do I don't see calling a FPSR violation on a runner going in standing up. The fielder is not at the base attempting a play.

[Velho]

59 minutes ago, JSam21 said:

It is if there is a play being attempted and a play was being made on R1.

Aren't we talking about the play on BR? R1 is already out. FPSR violation would be to call BR out as well.

[JSam21]

2 hours ago, Jimurray said:

If the pivot man clears the base as they usually do I don't see calling a FPSR violation on a runner going in standing up. The fielder is not at the base attempting a play.

There are requirements for a runner to go straight into the base... They did not meet those requirements. The only way that the rule says that a runner may go directly into the base is via a slide.

[JSam21]

1 hour ago, Velho said:

Aren't we talking about the play on BR? R1 is already out. FPSR violation would be to call BR out as well.

It just says "attempting play". It doesn't say anything about which runner. There is a play being made at that base... it is a force play... the runner either needs to slide directly into the base, or slide/run in a direction away from the defender. Running through the base while the defender is forced to move off of the base is not "in a direction away from" the defender. 

[MadMax]

3 hours ago, Tborze said:

Going into the base standing up is not in and of itself a violation of the rule. 

In NCAA and (now) NFHS, it is… especially if you’re a retired Runner. 

As @JSam21 points out, it is not, itself, INT. It is a violation of the defined FPSR, which constitutes INT. 

Recall that I’ve mentioned that in NCAA rules, we (umpires) are directed to “enforce the rule(s) as written”… well, I’ve witnessed this exactly… NAIA game, 3-man, and an average-speed R1, super fast BR (middle infielder, I think)… less than 2 outs… slow ground ball, relayed to F4, touches 2B putting R1 Out… BR has flown up the line, and F4 knows it. Doesn’t throw. R1 (now retired) comes in all Captain Cool 😎 and touches 2B standing up. Mark you, F4 is well off 2B, and BR is already past 1B… and U3 calls Time, declares FPSR violation, and calls Out BR. 

Woof. 🐶 

That’s the rule, isn’t it? 

On a tangent (or maybe sidetrack), this is a significant component as to why the play at 1B is not a Force Play… on that play, the BR is allowed to run to (and thru) the base, is he not? He doesn’t have to veer off or perform a (legal) slide, does he? The FPSR doesn’t explicitly list 1B as exempt. It merely says that on Force plays, “this” must occur. So why is 1B exempt?  
Perhaps because it is NOT a Force Play! 

[Tborze]

25 minutes ago, JSam21 said:

It just says "attempting to make a play".

What play was he attempting?  The play @ 2nd is already over!  
 

The FPSR was specifically created to eliminate illegal contact on the pivot, or IOW “breaking up “ the DP, ILLEGALLY!  
 

Going in standing up is NOT illegal unless what?  Even sit Y makes sure to mention that there was contact with R1. 
why?  If they want a FPSR called in the OP, why not make the CB play without any hindrance at all?  Maybe because it’s not?!  
 

@MadMax I truly don’t think not calling this goes against the rule as written. 
 

On my way to a game where I’m NOT calling this a FPSR violation  
 

 

[Velho]

This is video of how I see the play in my minds eye (with F6 instead of F4 to be precise)

[noumpere]

2 hours ago, Jimurray said:

If the pivot man clears the base as they usually do I don't see calling a FPSR violation on a runner going in standing up. The fielder is not at the base attempting a play.

That's my answer, too.

 

From the OP:

3 hours ago, 834k3r said:

F6 takes the ball on the 3B side of 2B

If F6* stayed on / at the base, then this is a FPSR violation.  If F6* continued to move toward third, then running at / through  the base is fine.  How far does F6* have to move?  Well, I always knew it if I saw it.

 

It's your call until you turn to first. -- then it's PUs call. Since you didn't turn....

 

* -- don't know why F6 instead of F4) would take throw from F5, but that' doesn't matter to the play.

 

[JSam21]

31 minutes ago, MadMax said:

So why is 1B exempt

*peaks head from behind bunker* Because the rule says "except first base" *covers*

[JSam21]

14 minutes ago, noumpere said:

If F6* stayed on / at the base, then this is a FPSR violation.  If F6* continued to move toward third, then running at / through  the base is fine.  How far does F6* have to move?  Well, I always knew it if I saw it.

The reason why it is a FPSR violation is because F6 doesn't have to move at all. Again... its a violation because the runner didn't meet their requirements in order to go straight into the base.

 

[MadMax]

3 hours ago, 834k3r said:

Question 1:  Who's call is the INT? PU is supposed to help clean up the play at 2B, but whose call is it for INT?

Either umpire. Even in 4-man (not 6, because INT is one of the “4 Calls Outfield U’s Shall Not Call”), any umpire should call INT if they see INT occur. Of course, there’s a bit of who has priority, or precedence, but in the 2-man system especially, there are certainly times where there are moments when INT (or OBS) can occur right next to a BU, and the PU sees it. 

In fact, the FPSR is so important in NCAA baseball, the CCA Manual directs the PU to take a different route towards 3B than the other 2 codes… why? So PU is in a closer proximity to 2B so as to observe potential FPSR violations! The call (of Safe / Out) at 2B is still wholly BU’s, but because the BU has to attend to the play at 1B, both umpires are directed to call a FPSR violation if they see it. 

13 minutes ago, Tborze said:

I truly don’t think not calling this goes against the rule as written.

I, Mad Max, say this kindly, but a NCAA assigner / evaluator / rules interpreter would have words (few & terse) with you about this perspective. 

9 minutes ago, Velho said:

This is video of how I see the play in my minds eye (with F6 instead of F4 to be precise)

Two problems here… 

1. This is obviously the 3rd Out of the inning. No further plays. 

2. OBR does not have a Force Play Slide Rule (they are very, very explicit about this). As such, the U2’s observing a different set of parameters. 
 

If this had been < 2 outs, and this had been a NCAA game, and that exact same action was performed by the participants – both fielder and R1 – we’ve got a FPSR. Even with R1 out, and knows he’s Out, by 3 strides… by going in to the base without a legal slide or veer off, he’s committed a FPSR. BR would be deemed Out as well. 

[Velho]

11 minutes ago, MadMax said:

If this had been < 2 outs, and this had been a NCAA game, and that exact same action was performed by the participants – both fielder and R1 – we’ve got a FPSR. Even with R1 out, and knows he’s Out, by 3 strides… by going in to the base without a legal slide or veer off, he’s committed a FPSR. BR would be deemed Out as well. 

 

[Velho]

1 minute ago, Velho said:

 

If this had been < 2 outs, and this had been a NCAA game, and that exact same action was performed by the participants – both fielder and R1 – we’ve got a FPSR. Even with R1 out, and knows he’s Out, by 3 strides… by going in to the base without a legal slide or veer off, he’s committed a FPSR. BR would be deemed Out as well. 

FED too?

[JSam21]

24 minutes ago, MadMax said:

I, Mad Max, say this kindly, but a NCAA assigner / evaluator / rules interpreter would have words (few & terse) with you about this perspective. 

I passed on this exact call at a 3 umpire camp... My evaluators had at least 10 trips to Omaha between them... Let's just say I haven't passed on one since.