Runner hit by batted ball

[marriard]

I have found 1 case play in NFHS that talks about no fielder having an opportunity to field the ball.

NFHS 8.6.12With R1 on second, B2 hits between F5 and F6, both of whom are playing close for a possible bunt. The ball touches R1 and deflects to foul ground. F5 and F6 were in such a position that there was no chance to play the ball. Ruling: If R1 accidentally touched the ball, it is ignored because the batted ball passed a fielder and no other fielder had an opportunity to make an out. If R1 intentionally deflected the batted ball, the umpire shall rule interference, the ball becomes dead, R1 is declared out and B2 is awarded first base.

There is surprisingly few cases on this - the ones I see all involve an infielder being close to the ball so it is clear they were involved in the play. Three ump clinics/camps I have attended basically defined it as infielders being in the vicinity and able to make a play.... Of course no rule sets bothers to define what 'passed an infielder' actually means.

Found a baseball case.....

(5) Runners on first and second, both runners stealing. Batter shows bunt, the first and third basemen move in, and the shortstop moves to cover third. The batter swings at the last minute and hits a ground ball in the direction of the shortstop position. However, the shortstop has moved to cover third base, and no one is in position to field the ball. The ground ball strikes the runner advancing from second base.
Ruling: Runner from second is declared out for being struck by a batted ball. The batter-runner is placed at first base. The ball is not considered to have gone through or by an infielder in this play

 

[Comp]

If you are getting that at clinics it isn't coming from any rule book, that is their own personal interpretation of the rule and is not based on any rule or case play.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[CoachJD]

This thread certainly was entertaining.

One thing stuck out for me: The plate umpire made this call.

Is that proper procedure? It seems the base umpire should have this responsibility, especially since whether it passed a fielder could be difficult for the plate umpire (or not; and I don't mean in this specific situation necessarily).

 

[marriard]

If you are getting that at clinics it isn't coming from any rule book, that is their own personal interpretation of the rule and is not based on any rule or case play.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

Possibly, but then you only have one somewhat unclear case play as well, so I could say much the same. I am actually going to send a couple of extreme examples to my NFHS and ASA Umpire chiefs and some of my umpires room and see what they say.

All I know is that the most common scenario for a runner being hit by a batted ball is the really hard hit up the middle that is going to be a single and can't possibly be fielded by SS or 2B but hits the runner coming off 2nd is called an out all the time. And considering where F3 and F5 field in softball, that is a problem if they need to be considered a fielder the ball has passed even though they are nowhere near the play.

 

[Big Daddy Michigan]

This, to say the least, has been hugely entertaining. And informative, not only as to the nature of the rules and their interpretations but also to the nature of the crazed, over-competitive, and rude parent.

LOL

Yes, it was.

 

[MTR]

Possibly, but then you only have one somewhat unclear case play as well, so I could say much the same. I am actually going to send a couple of extreme examples to my NFHS and ASA Umpire chiefs and some of my umpires room and see what they say.

All I know is that the most common scenario for a runner being hit by a batted ball is the really hard hit up the middle that is going to be a single and can't possibly be fielded by SS or 2B but hits the runner coming off 2nd is called an out all the time. And considering where F3 and F5 field in softball, that is a problem if they need to be considered a fielder the ball has passed even though they are nowhere near the play.

Okay, it needs to be noted that F3 and F5 are irrelevant on a ball up the middle. And no where in the rules is there a requirement for an infielder to have a viable play on the ball. The determination should be based on the location of the fielder closest to the runner and a line running parallel to the adjacent baseline. It isn't that difficult and easier than using the umpire's positioning mechanic which is a direct line between two nearest defenders.

 

[marriard]

Okay, it needs to be noted that F3 and F5 are irrelevant on a ball up the middle. And no where in the rules is there a requirement for an infielder to have a viable play on the ball. The determination should be based on the location of the fielder closest to the runner and a line running parallel to the adjacent baseline. It isn't that difficult and easier than using the umpire's positioning mechanic which is a direct line between two nearest defenders.

OK... WHY are F3 and F5 irrelevant on a ball up the middle? They are infielders and the ball has technically passed them. There is nothing in the rule that says only the closest fielder should be considered. And how far does this parallel line extend?
And if they are irrelevant, why for example would F3 suddenly be relevant if the ball goes through where F4 would be standing?

And it is not that I disagree with you or even Comp for that matter - it is just that between various scenarios, vague case plays and terribly written rules there still doesn't seem to be a published clear definition of what a passed infielder actually is. If what you have said is right - where do I find it? I am looking for something that would cover for example when a 3B playing in is considered or not considered a 'passed' infielder on a ball that is in a gap on the left, up the middle and to the right and destined to be a hit if it hadn't hit the runner.

 

[chinamigarden]

Thank you, most of these replies are probably from umpires who have nothing better to do. It was the wrong call, I only wanted clarification and people got defensive ����.

Geez the thin skins on people here right, I mean you come in here with no knowledge of the rules of softball and baseball and start lobbing insults around at people and then they have the nerve to get defensive.

 

[chinamigarden]

Have you ever seen a runner get hit with a batted ball and them called safe?

yes. I have. If you watch enough games you will see lots of rules you didn't know existed. If you actually read the rule books you will find even more.

 

[MTR]

OK... WHY are F3 and F5 irrelevant on a ball up the middle? They are infielders and the ball has technically passed them. There is nothing in the rule that says only the closest fielder should be considered. And how far does this parallel line extend?
And if they are irrelevant, why for example would F3 suddenly be relevant if the ball goes through where F4 would be standing?

And it is not that I disagree with you or even Comp for that matter - it is just that between various scenarios, vague case plays and terribly written rules there still doesn't seem to be a published clear definition of what a passed infielder actually is. If what you have said is right - where do I find it? I am looking for something that would cover for example when a 3B playing in is considered or not considered a 'passed' infielder on a ball that is in a gap on the left, up the middle and to the right and destined to be a hit if it hadn't hit the runner.

USA plays on a diamond, otherwise there would be no reason to exclude the pitcher. Would R1 advancing to 2B be excepted from the rule since s/he is behind F3 and/or F5 if F4 may not have the opportunity to make an out. And that is important, if must be an out, not just the possibility of making a play.