Deflected Batted Ball Hits Runner

[johnnyg08]

I've seen this in a few spots on the interwebs...

Two out, bases loaded and batter hits a line drive off the pitchers glove and starts to roll to 2nd baseman to make a play(my judgement) but runner directly in front of 2nd baseman is hit by ball - (not intentional) -

A) judgment call on runner interference, the 2nd baseman would have made a play, runner out.

B) no call let the play go on

C) dead ball all runner advance one base

D) obstruction on fielder - delayed dead ball

Supporting Case Play:
 

 

2018 Interp
SITUATION 11: With R2 on second base, a grounded batted ball deflects off F1’s ankle. The ball deflects toward F5 as he moves in to field the ball and he is run over by R2. Both R2 and the batter-runner are safe. Is this interference or obstruction? RULING: This is interference and R2 will be declared out. F5 must be given the opportunity to field this batted ball on his initial attempt. The batter-runner will be awarded first base unless it is judged the interference prevented the defense from making a double play. (8-4-2g)

[noumpere]

There's a difference between "interfering with a FIELDER" and "interfering with the BALL".

Once the ball is deflected, the runner must still avoid a FIELDER (who is making a play) but need NOT avoid the ball (but may not intentionally interfere).

The 2018 inter you posted deals with interfering with the FIELDER.  The highlighted portion of 8.4.2I applies when the ball is NOT deflected, so it' snot applicable to your question.

 

The answer to your question is B.

[zoops]

Without doing more research, it would seem that the highlighted portion above would make the OP's play INT.  

[noumpere]

9 minutes ago, zoops said:

Without doing more research, it would seem that the highlighted portion above would make the OP's play INT.  

The highlighted portion refers to patr (b) of the case play in which "the ball passes several feet to the left of F4".  In the OP, the ball is deflected by F1.  Completely different plays, with different rulings.  You cant par (a) of the case play.

[MadMax]

I’m with @noumpere on this one – it’s a “that’s nothing”, and play on. In fact, for amateur baseball especially, I’d borrow a saying from soccer, and call “Play on! Play on!” while giving an emphatic “that’s nothing (Safe)” mechanic. 

This is a big call. It not only demonstrates that you’re tracking the ball (and know its status), but that you also know the rule – and its intricacies – implicitly. 

[The Man in Blue]

First,

NFHS needs to practice better grammar and be more judicious with their use of commas.

8-4-2(k) (A runner is out)

What do you mean with all these commas?!  Which part are you applying "except the pitcher" to?  As written, the exception applies to both clauses.

To apply it to just one clause, you would need a semicolon:

. . . (1) before it touches an infielder; or (2) after it passes any infielder, except the pitcher, and the umpire is convinced . . . 

OK, but let's be smart umpires and keep reading:

5-1-1(f) (Dead ball, batted ball)

Now we have NO commas!?  

Actually, that's OK.  BOTH clauses must apply.  (1) Before touching any fielder and (2) before passing any fielder other than the pitcher.  So the pitcher IS a fielder in #1 (touch), but NOT a fielder in #2 (pass).

Smart umpire . . . keep reading.

6-1-5 (Pitching) 

 

A pitcher is NOT an infielder if the ball passes him.  He IS an infielder if he is trying to field it and it hits him.

So, once it deflected off his glove, the "touched an infielder" requirement is met.  Play on.

 

We really shouldn't have to parse through that many pieces to get there.  Better grammar up front would have made this easier.

 

(Cue the argument about balls that deflect off of him BUT he WASN'T making an effort to field it . . . grammatically, he is NOT an infielder in those cases . . . )