The interpretation by our state during their tournament was that on a high throw from fair territory that causes the defender to jump upwards, with her entire body still in fair territory except for the one foot that kicks out to the colored base, then she has NOT been pulled into foul ground and must use the white base to get the out. It makes sense to me. If I read the rule verbatim, I don't agree that you have been pulled into foul ground just because you stick one foot into foul ground.
Double Base question
- Thread starter obbay
- Start date
Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch
Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.
The interpretation by our state during their tournament was that on a high throw from fair territory that causes the defender to jump upwards, with her entire body still in fair territory except for the one foot that kicks out to the colored base, then she has NOT been pulled into foul ground and must use the white base to get the out. It makes sense to me. If I read the rule verbatim, I don't agree that you have been pulled into foul ground just because you stick one foot into foul ground.
I've never found any printed NFHS interpretation that says that.
(I have their case book, access to their website for officials, plus receive their annual pre-season rule publication. Maybe they've printed this somewhere else? I would welcome anyone with an official, existing, published interpretation to post it here.)
But if that's what the state wants, then that's what the state gets. Any state is free to modify, delete, adopt or interpret any NFHS rule as they see fit. I'd just be curious to know if they were coming up with that on their own or taking it from some published source.
I don't have any issue with them interpreting it that way. They're free to do so. I tend to agree with you that the fielder shouldn't be able to use the colored base on this play. The original intent of this "exception to the rule" was so that a fielder who was completely past the base and all the way over into foul ground wouldn't have to cross back over to the white, which requires an intersecting collision course with the runner's path.
So, now not only does the umpire have to judge if the ball beats the runner or the runner beats the ball, if the fielder jumps in the air to catch the ball he has to judge if the fielder's body stayed "mostly" (65%? 75% More?) over fair ground and if her foot came back down right on the colored base or if she jabbed her foot at the colored base.
What if the fielder lands "foot first" on the colored base? What if she lands on the white base, then sticks her foot on the colored one? If her body is still mostly over fair ground, why the heck would she be sticking her foot over into foul ground? Wouldn't the white base that's in fair territory, where the fielder still mostly is, be closer to her foot?
Can we possibly make this already convoluted rule any more convoluted? The rule already takes up an entire page of the rule book. All that, just to tell runners and fielders how to touch a base!
(I have their case book, access to their website for officials, plus receive their annual pre-season rule publication. Maybe they've printed this somewhere else? I would welcome anyone with an official, existing, published interpretation to post it here.)
But if that's what the state wants, then that's what the state gets. Any state is free to modify, delete, adopt or interpret any NFHS rule as they see fit. I'd just be curious to know if they were coming up with that on their own or taking it from some published source.
I don't have any issue with them interpreting it that way. They're free to do so. I tend to agree with you that the fielder shouldn't be able to use the colored base on this play. The original intent of this "exception to the rule" was so that a fielder who was completely past the base and all the way over into foul ground wouldn't have to cross back over to the white, which requires an intersecting collision course with the runner's path.
So, now not only does the umpire have to judge if the ball beats the runner or the runner beats the ball, if the fielder jumps in the air to catch the ball he has to judge if the fielder's body stayed "mostly" (65%? 75% More?) over fair ground and if her foot came back down right on the colored base or if she jabbed her foot at the colored base.
What if the fielder lands "foot first" on the colored base? What if she lands on the white base, then sticks her foot on the colored one? If her body is still mostly over fair ground, why the heck would she be sticking her foot over into foul ground? Wouldn't the white base that's in fair territory, where the fielder still mostly is, be closer to her foot?
Can we possibly make this already convoluted rule any more convoluted? The rule already takes up an entire page of the rule book. All that, just to tell runners and fielders how to touch a base!
Last edited:
Don't let MTR fool you. He came up with the idea of the safety bag and was instrumental in it's implementation. He did this out of concern for the safety of the participants.
- Jun 22, 2008
- 3,438
- 48
What a dumb statement. I think the "double base" is ludicrous and part of dummying down the game because of weak coaching and execution.
MTR.....sorry you missed my sarcasm, but thanks for playing.
Greenmonsters
Wannabe Duck Boat Owner
After SB and BB are returned to the Olympics, retirement of the safety base should be the next crusade IMO.
