Fielder/ Runner Contact Question

Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch

Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.

Apr 13, 2013
264
0
Runner stealing Home, DD is the pitcher. DD catches the ball, gets knocked back a few feet by the runner and drops the ball. Runner was called safe because she dropped the ball. There was nothing malicious on the runner’s part but the ball appeared to be in DD's possession but it was a bang bang play.

Was that the right call? How much contact is the runner allowed to make?

(Ironically we have been having a family dispute about our League having a most slide rule, I won we do not)
 
Aug 29, 2011
2,581
83
NorCal
Runner stealing Home, DD is the pitcher. DD catches the ball, gets knocked back a few feet by the runner and drops the ball. Runner was called safe because she dropped the ball. There was nothing malicious on the runner’s part but the ball appeared to be in DD's possession but it was a bang bang play.

Was that the right call? How much contact is the runner allowed to make?

(Ironically we have been having a family dispute about our League having a most slide rule, I won we do not)

As long as you have this I think most umps will rule the contact incedental. That is sometimes collisions happen. If she dropped the ball I'm going to say it was very likely the correct call was made.
 
Mar 22, 2012
36
0
I'm assuming no slide. The lack of a "must slide" rule doesn't matter if the runner went in standing up and contacted the fielder with force and, in the judgement of the umpire, interfered with the fielder attempting to make a play. This would be INT if those conditions are met.
 
Apr 13, 2013
264
0
Sorry, the runner did not slide. Best way I can describe it is she came in like a football blocker on a sweep with her arms chest high protecting herself. Again nothing malleolus about it, she was attempting to slow down when she realized she was going to annihilate DD.
 
Jan 24, 2011
144
0
Texas
This is a HTBT (Had To Be There) play. Sometimes there are wrecks in softball and it's nothing more than that. Without seeing the play, it's hard to determine if there was INT, or even perhaps OBS on this particular play. If in the opinion of the official it didn't occur, not much more you can do, it's a judgment call, just like many others are.

Like I tell coaches that ask me why such and such wasn't INT, I tell them usually a variation of "Coach, INT is an immediate dead ball and I would have killed the play if I thought I had INT". He then usually proceeds to ask if I'll go check with my partner of which I reply with nearly the same sentence except changing "I" to "he". :)
 
Mar 22, 2012
36
0
Sweet Lou - Malicious contact is not required for INT, only ejection. "Most" umpires may use this to determine INT, but the rule book would not support them.

Hit by the Pitch - It doesn't matter if the runner slowed. Intent doesn't matter in this type of INT. What matters, by rule, is whether she went in standing up with force and interfered.
 
Dec 16, 2011
26
0
Sweet Lou - Malicious contact is not required for INT, only ejection. "Most" umpires may use this to determine INT, but the rule book would not support them.

Hit by the Pitch - It doesn't matter if the runner slowed. Intent doesn't matter in this type of INT. What matters, by rule, is whether she went in standing up with force and interfered.

Rule reference please?

Collisions happen...if the fielder (F1 in this case) made a tag, fell and then dropped the ball....I would likely have an out. If the ball came loose during the contact, then the fielder could not have had secure possession of the ball and there would not have been a legal tag. I am not saying it could not be interference, just that it won't always be interference.

Hard to say without seeing it....there is no cookie cutter answer.

Joel
 
Last edited:
Mar 22, 2012
36
0
Rule reference please?
This is NCAA rule, but I believe ASA, Fed, and others are similar:

"12.19.6 A base runner may not remain on her feet and deliberately, with great
force, crash into a defensive player who is holding the ball and waiting to
apply a tag."

I am not saying it could not be interference, just that it won't always be interference.
I never said anything about it always being INT. I won't repeat what I posted, it's only a couple posts above.

Of course it's hard to say without seeing, but the OP states "DD catches the ball, gets knocked back a few feet by the runner and drops the ball." You say "...if the fielder (F1 in this case) made a tag, fell and then dropped the ball....". Not quite apples to apples is it?
 
Dec 16, 2011
26
0
You implied that an umpire could always have interference on a play such as this.

The OP never stated when the ball was dropped......infer what you want......I would still have to see it.

Thanks for playing.

Joel
 
Mar 22, 2012
36
0
You implied that an umpire could always have interference on a play such as this.
Here's my original post with bold/underline for emphasis:

"I'm assuming no slide. The lack of a "must slide" rule doesn't matter if the runner went in standing up and contacted the fielder with force and, in the judgement of the umpire, interfered with the fielder attempting to make a play. This would be INT if those conditions are met."

Either you didn't go back and read it or you want to point out non-existent implications to cover for misreading the post. Fine, but I implied nothing.

The OP never stated when the ball was dropped......infer what you want......I would still have to see it.

"DD catches the ball, gets knocked back a few feet by the runner and drops the ball."

I guess someone could glean from this that the ball was dropped before the runner knocked her back. Probably the same someone who would glean my implying there would always be INT on plays like this.

Thanks for playing.

You're welcome.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
42,830
Messages
679,475
Members
21,445
Latest member
Bmac81802
Top