Ball hits bat twice

[Comp]

Under the batter runner section of the rulebook, there is nothing regarding a batters box. If a batter runner makes contact with a fair batted ball they are out. Nfhs issued a clarification this year stating such.

If a batted ball richocets up and contact the batter or bat it's a dead ball and foul. But, if the ball is over fair territory and batter runner advancing makes contact with the ball they are out.

 

[Nasolis]

Under the batter runner section of the rulebook, there is nothing regarding a batters box. If a batter runner makes contact with a fair batted ball they are out. Nfhs issued a clarification this year stating such.

If a batted ball richocets up and contact the batter or bat it's a dead ball and foul. But, if the ball is over fair territory and batter runner advancing makes contact with the ball they are out.

I found this in the "batter is out" section of the rulebook.

"7-4 Art.13 ... After hitting or bunting a ball, the bat hits the ball a second time while the ball is on or over fair territory, or is on over foul territory and, in the umpire's judgement, had a chance to become a fair ball. EXCEPTION: If the batter is in the batter's box and the bat is in the batter's hand when the second contact occurs, it is a foul ball regardless of whether the was on over fair or foul territory unless, in the umpire's judgement, the batter intentionally hit the ball a second time."

And this in the "strikes, balls and hits" section.

"7-2 Art 1 f. a batted ball contacts the batter in the batter's box (foul ball)."

These 2 rules tell me that if the batter/batter-runner is still in the box and contact with a batted ball is made then it is foul ball regards of location (fair/foul), as most people know that about half of the batter's box is in fair territory. I could not find a rule, but every training/clinic I have gone to has specified that if the batter/batter-runner has 1 foot in contact with the ground in the batter's box then they are considered to be in the batter's box.

While not a case play this play just doesn't seem right to me. Batter makes contact with the ball, the ball bounces off of home-plate and bounces towards the pitcher's plate, with 1 foot on the ground in the batter's box (a) the bat contacts the ball (while in batter-runner's hand); (b) the batter runner's knee contacts the ball. RULING: (a) dead ball-foul; (b) dead ball-out.

FYI, (a) is almost word-for-word from the case book, (b) was added to show the disparity between rule 7-2 Art 1 f and the ruling.

EDIT to add rule 7-2 heading.

 

[Comp]

You are looking under batter, when the batter hits a ball that is on or over fair territory they cease to be a batter and are now a batter runner. There is no reference to batters box under batter runner.

Nfhs just issued a clarification this year about a batted ball that is just a short distance in front of home plate. As the runner is leaving the batters box with one foot still in the box they kick the ball. It is a dead ball out, the batter runner made contact with a fair batted ball. Rules clarifications are not new rules, they are clarification of existing rules and how they are supposed to be called.

Now, one thing the clarification did say was that if the fair ball had settled inside the batters box and was kicked by the runner it is a foul ball.

The rules that protect the batter from being hit are on balls that come right back and hit them or come up and hit the bat again right after being hit. Not after the batter has had a chance to start running.

 

[Nasolis]

Any time the batter makes contact with the ball they become a batter-runner, the ball being over fair/foul territory has no bearing as to if they are a batter-runner or not. If a batter hits a long ball, they are still considered a batter-runner until it is ruled foul, if caught they are out (which is found in batter-runner is out, if it is not caught then they remain a batter.

There are too many inconsistencies with-in the rule book to call the batter-runner out in this case. Rule 7-2 Art 1 f (above post #12) & Rule 2-25 "Foul ball, Foul tip" Art 1. A foul ball is a batted ball that: (f) touches the batter or the bat in the batter's hand(s) a second time while the batter is within the batter's box." I understand your point of it being a batter-runner vs batter, but the batter-runner can go back to being just a batter (see foul ball that lands above). I believe, the difference is batted ball vs non-batted ball. The case book has a play were its a failed catch on strike 3 that ricocheted off the catcher and the batter-runner kicked the ball, which is an out. Again, the difference is batted vs non-batted ball.

The rule for what makes a batter-runner, 8-1 Art 1 a "the batter legally hits a fair ball." That is what's at question, my scenario above the ball wasn't a legally hit fair ball, because it landed in foul territory after passing 1st or 3rd base in the air, therefore the batter-runner reestablished herself as the batter or never became a batter-runner in the first place. I would go with the first one because there is interference at play if for a pop-up in the infield that is over foul territory, so it can be inferred that until the ball is judged fair or foul the batter becomes a batter-runner when the ball is makes contact with the bat, if it lands foul they go back to being a batter, if fair they are the batter-runner, all play has stopped, then they become a runner.

In the discussed case, did the batter hit a legal fair ball, I do not think so, because of Rule 7-2 and Rule 2-25. They were still in batter's box when contact with the ball happened, which is ruled foul just the same as if it passed 1st and 3rd in the air and first made contact with the ground in foul territory.

The casebook mentions something very similar to your case in which it is a ball that was failed to be caught by the catcher on strike 3, which is another way the batter can become the batter-runner 8-1 Art 1 (b), so not a batted (hit) ball. I do vaguely remember TASO sending something or maybe it was a discussion at one of our meetings, about the differences between saying this was an out if the batter-runner kicked the ball because a different rule made the batter a batter-runner. So maybe that is the clarification that was sent out. Again, batted vs non batted ball.

Also, can you please post the clarification that came out? As mentioned, I vaguely remember something coming out about an uncaught 3rd strike, but not a batted ball. https://www.nfhs.org/sports-resource-content/softball-rules-interpretations-2023/# or https://www.nfhs.org/activities-sports/softball/. I would figure that any interpretations would be posted there for all to see, but I can't find it. I also couldn't find it in my e-mail from TASO. Since, they released the clarification, why wasn't rule 2.25 Art 1 f changed to remove batter from the verbiage and/or 7-2 Art 1 f completely removed? It would appear then that book has some inconsistencies that were not addressed or fixed (not that hasn't happened before). That seems like a major rule change versus a clarification or editing change.

I understand how clarifications work, I see them all the time through ref quest for multiple sports.

 

[Comp]

April 17, 2023
Updated April 24, 2023
NFHS Softball Weekly Rule Interpretations
Situation 1: With no outs, B1 is at bat in the right hand batter’s box and hits a ball that goes directly off
home plate and settles in front of home plate between the batter’s boxes. As B1 is starting to run to first
base their right foot contacts the ball. The plate umpire rules this a foul ball as B1’s left foot is still
within the batter’s box when contact was made with the batted ball. RULING: Incorrect ruling. Once the
ball is contacted by B1 in fair territory outside of their batter’s box it is a fair ball. Since B1 has now hit a
fair ball they become a batter-runner and are ruled out for making contact with a fair batted ball before
reaching first base. (2-20-1a, 2-20-1d, 8-1-1a, 8-2-7e)

 

[Nasolis]

OK, but that ball settled meaning it hit and remained in fair territory. By rule it is already a fair ball as the batter delayed their run enough time for the ball to stop moving and settle, therefore a legally hit fair ball. In the OPs video and my scenarios, the ball has not settled yet, therefore the rules I post should take effect. After seeing the clarification, I think we are talking two different rules. One the ball has been established as fair since it settled, becoming a legally hit fair ball, the others the ball has not been legally deemed a fair ball. A moving ball in the infield that contacts the batter-runner while still in the box is a foul per rules posted above.

Bottomline: The key word is settled, if the ball was to settle, without being touch by the defense, in foul territory between home & 1st or 3rd then it would be foul because it settled, and the batter-runner would return to batter. Same as this clarification, the ball settled, without being touched by the defense, in fair territory making it a legally hit fair ball.

 

[Comp]

Give me a break, settled is not the keyword. So a ball bouncing down first baseline and the runner kicking it is nothing because the ball hasn't settled?????

One more time, under batter runner there is no batters box. It provides a batter runner zero protection if they initiate the contact with a fair batted ball.

 

[Greatdaytobeawildcat]

Ball hits bat in hand twice while batter is in box, dead ball foul (no matter where the ball is - over fair territory or not)

Ball hits batter in box (while ball is not over fair territory) dead ball foul

Ball hits player while ball is on or over fair territory, the ball is fair, the fair ball makes the batter a batter-runner, and the batter runner is out.

 

[The Man In Blue]

@Nasolis ... I think the difference you are missing between those two rules is very subtle and what an umpire must determine: did the player/bat contact the ball OR did the ball contact the player/bat.

That is where the difference is at in the two rules you posted.

I found this in the "batter is out" section of the rulebook.

"7-4 Art.13 ... After hitting or bunting a ball, the bat hits the ball a second time while the ball is on or over fair territory, or is on over foul territory and, in the umpire's judgement, had a chance to become a fair ball. EXCEPTION: If the batter is in the batter's box and the bat is in the batter's hand when the second contact occurs, it is a foul ball regardless of whether the was on over fair or foul territory unless, in the umpire's judgement, the batter intentionally hit the ball a second time."

"7-2 Art 1 f. a batted ball contacts the batter in the batter's box (foul ball)."

 

[Nasolis]

@The Man In Blue ... No, I did not miss that, what I am trying to get at is the must be determined to be fair/foul if contact with player and ball occur while the batter is in the box. It is also in the definitions to requote "Rule 2-25 "Foul ball, Foul tip" Art 1. A foul ball is a batted ball that: (f) touches the batter or the bat in the batter's hand(s) a second time while the batter is within the batter's box." The definition says touches meaning it is regardless of who or what causes the contact. The rules have to be put together from different places. Did the batter make contact with a pitched ball, yes see rule 8-1, did the ball touch (contact) the batter while still in the batter's box, if yes see rule 7-2 with the definition from rule 2-25, if batter is not in the box, then see rule 8-2 art 7 (batter-runner interference).

What y'all are saying is immediately after bat/ball contact the batter/batter-runner is out, if they touch the ball while its over fair territory, completely ignoring the definition of a foul ball. Unless the ball contacts the back foot of the batter, or the batter is lined up in the back of the batter's box., basically in foul territory.

@Comp ... Settled is the keyword for that clarification. A ball bounding down the line as you put would be interference if the ball is over fair territory and the batter was completely out of their box, because 8-2 art 7 e "making contact with a fair batted ball before reaching first base." However, while they batter is still in the box, they considered the batter or all purposes, because in order to become a batter-runner you must hit a legal fair ball. According, the definitions it is a foul ball if the ball touches the batter while in the batter's box. A batter does not become a batter-runner unless certain conditions apply, which is why a 250 foul ball the batter remains a batter, the legality of a fair ball did not occur.

Webster Dictonary defines Settled as "to come to rest", so yes that is a key word in that statement. The ball came to rest in fair territory, therefore becoming a legal fair ball and the batter is now a batter-runner, did they contact the ball prior to reaching first base, yes out for interference, per rule 8-2 art 7. If the ball is close to the line, then the determination must be made if the ball was in fair or foul territory, because that matters.

If "settles" was not a keyword, then why include it why not say:

Situation 1: With no outs, B1 is at bat in the right hand batter’s box and hits a ball that goes directly off
home plate and goes into fair territory settles in front of home plate between the batter’s boxes. As B1 is starting to run to first
base their right foot contacts the ball. The plate umpire rules this a foul ball as B1’s left foot is still
within the batter’s box when contact was made with the batted ball. RULING: Incorrect ruling. Once the
ball is contacted by B1 in fair territory outside of their batter’s box it is a fair ball. Since B1 has now hit a
fair ball they become a batter-runner and are ruled out for making contact with a fair batted ball before
reaching first base. (2-20-1a, 2-20-1d, 8-1-1a, 8-2-7e). *Italics are added; Bold to be removed*

The Ruling even states "Since B1 has now hit..." why would the word now be placed there? Is it because, it didn't become fair until it was settled, without it being settled then the ball could have rolled foul and then what it's a foul ball, because it didn't settle.

What I am saying is that in the OP video, if the batter's foot was in contact on the ground in the batter's box then it is simply a foul ball. Why, see rule 2-25 art 1f, they did not legally become a batter-runner because the ball was not established a true fair ball yet even though it was over fair territory. If not in contact with ground in the batter's box then out for interference.