Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch

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

Register Log in

Runner hit in face on double play attempt. Correct call?

Jun 22, 2008
3,386
63
Just a quick question for you, MTR... When you have a player steal a base, do you teach them to go into the base standing up? If they answer is "no", why on Earth would you have them go into 2nd base standing up on a double play? I want my runners to get to 2nd as quickly as possible and sliding is the quickest way.
What difference does it make what a coach is teaching their player, there is no requirement in the rules to slide EVER. Running the bases is not an act of interference and except for the strange interpretation of the rule NCAA has put out I know of no other rule set that would consider the play in question to be interference.
 
Jul 24, 2013
19
1
I'm not questioning if it is interference or the legality of sliding vs not sliding. All I am saying is going into 2nd base standing up on a double play is very risky for the runner's safety. Also, the quickest way to get to the bag is sliding. The runner has every right to go into 2nd standing up. The fact that it is slower and the runner risks getting a thrown ball in the chest or head makes me wonder why it is done. The odds of the defense actually turning a double play are pretty slim. Having the runner go standing into 2nd base to prevent a double play attempt that probably won't be successful seems like a huge risk to the safety of the runner.
 

Greenmonsters

Wannabe Duck Boat Owner
Feb 21, 2009
6,175
0
New England
And that is outright stupid. The answer to my question about the catcher should tell you why.
Here's your stupid NCAA SB rule:

"12.8.5 When she interferes with a fielder attempting to field a batted ball,
interferes with a fielder attempting to throw the ball or intentionally
interferes with a thrown ball.
EFFECT—The ball is dead. The batter-runner is awarded first base
unless she is the player in violation. If the official scorer judges the
batted ball would have been a hit, the batter is credited with a base hit,
but if not, it is scored as a fielder’s choice. Each base runner not forced
by the batter-runner must return to the last base legally touched at the
time of the interference.
If the interference, in the umpire’s judgment, is an obvious attempt to
prevent a double play and occurs before the base runner is put out, the
runner being played on also shall be called out."

:p
 
Oct 24, 2010
146
18
Here is the AR in question:

A.R.12.19.2.3: With a runner on first base, the batter hits a ground ball to the second baseman. She fields the ball cleanly and tosses it to the shortstop for the first out of the inning. The shortstop attempts to throw the ball to first base to complete a double play however her throw hits the runner’s helmet as she is in the baseline half way between first and second base. The batter-runner reaches first base safely as the ball drops to the ground near the runner. Because the ball deflected off a base runner who was already out, does Rule 12.19.2.3 apply?

RULING: The base runner closest to home would be declared out if a retired runner interfered with a defender’s opportunity to
make a play. However if, in the umpire’s judgment, the runner was acting appropriately and was not reasonably expected to slide
(because she was not near a base) nor assumed to intentionally put her head in the path of a thrown ball in order to interfere, then
the ball would remain live and play would stand without penalty.

and the rule:

12.19.2.3 The runner may not intentionally interfere with a thrown ball.
Note: A runner hit with a thrown ball does not necessarily constitute interference.
 

MTR

Jun 22, 2008
3,437
48
Here's your stupid NCAA SB rule:

"12.8.5 When she interferes with a fielder attempting to field a batted ball,
interferes with a fielder attempting to throw the ball or intentionally
interferes with a thrown ball.

EFFECT—The ball is dead. The batter-runner is awarded first base
unless she is the player in violation. If the official scorer judges the
batted ball would have been a hit, the batter is credited with a base hit,
but if not, it is scored as a fielder’s choice. Each base runner not forced
by the batter-runner must return to the last base legally touched at the
time of the interference.
If the interference, in the umpire’s judgment, is an obvious attempt to
prevent a double play and occurs before the base runner is put out, the
runner being played on also shall be called out."

:p
Yep, see the bold portion? And you still haven't answered the question about the catcher.
 

Greenmonsters

Wannabe Duck Boat Owner
Feb 21, 2009
6,175
0
New England
Yep, see the bold portion? And you still haven't answered the question about the catcher.
Yep, but don't skip the part about attempting to break up a double play. And if you don't think that is exactly what the Vols runner was trying to do, you should probably stick to providing rule book interpretations on the interwebz and leave the on field work to those umpires that know the rule book AND understand how the game is played.
 

Greenmonsters

Wannabe Duck Boat Owner
Feb 21, 2009
6,175
0
New England
Yep, see the bold portion? And you still haven't answered the question about the catcher.
Relative to the catcher situation, the batter has a right to the batter's box, even if they've been struck out, AND doesn't have the time/ opportunity to move out of the way; as such, the catcher is obligated to find a clear throwing lane. Whereas a runner going into 2B on a potential DP has 60 ft and 3+ seconds to prepare to slide into the bag on a close play or veer or duck out of the way if the play isn't close enough to merit a slide. While the rule book doesn't require the runner to slide in that situation, it also neglects advising the runner to wear full body armor if they choose to go in standing up to try to prevent a DP.
 

MTR

Jun 22, 2008
3,437
48
Relative to the catcher situation, the batter has a right to the batter's box, even if they've been struck out, AND doesn't have the time/ opportunity to move out of the way; as such, the catcher is obligated to find a clear throwing lane.
The reason the catcher finds a "throwing lane" is because s/he is aware of the obstruction (batter) standing in the way and know where to go to complete the play. The infielder has that same advantage of knowing where the runner is going to be so they can determine the best manner in which to complete the play.

Whereas a runner going into 2B on a potential DP has 60 ft and 3+ seconds to prepare to slide into the bag on a close play or veer or duck out of the way if the play isn't close enough to merit a slide.
If you honestly believe that you need to stick to on-line fantasies and leave the coaching to the concession stand grandma. The ONLY thing on the runners mind is reaching the next base safely in some manner. Most often, that is a direct line. It seems you want them to consider failure before they even get started. This runner usually has less than a half a second to adjust to anything. Just because it appears a defender has/has caught the ball and touched the base does not mean that runner can just disappear. And that simple observation does not necessarily mean they have been put out and no umpire's call is instantaneous. How often are players coached to not stop playing until they hear the umpire's call?

On top of that, you want that runner to intentionally place their teammate in jeopardy by moving into the path of the defender's "throwing lane" (still cannot find that in the rule book) which IS an act of INT which will undoubtedly be called. Oh wait, that's right, you want them to determine that some 60' away. I guess you expect them to read the mind of the defender with the ball to know which way to veer. Tell me, when do the coaches practice the "veering" mechanic so the players know what to do when they are supposedly out and should concede the base?
While the rule book doesn't require the runner to slide in that situation, it also neglects advising the runner to wear full body armor if they choose to go in standing up to try to prevent a DP.
Maybe that is because it is the coach's responsibility to teach the players how to play the game. BTW, this isn't something new. The method of playing and the rules have been the same for more than 80 years.
 

Greenmonsters

Wannabe Duck Boat Owner
Feb 21, 2009
6,175
0
New England
The reason the catcher finds a "throwing lane" is because s/he is aware of the obstruction (batter) standing in the way and know where to go to complete the play. The infielder has that same advantage of knowing where the runner is going to be so they can determine the best manner in which to complete the play.



If you honestly believe that you need to stick to on-line fantasies and leave the coaching to the concession stand grandma. The ONLY thing on the runners mind is reaching the next base safely in some manner. Most often, that is a direct line. It seems you want them to consider failure before they even get started. This runner usually has less than a half a second to adjust to anything. Just because it appears a defender has/has caught the ball and touched the base does not mean that runner can just disappear. And that simple observation does not necessarily mean they have been put out and no umpire's call is instantaneous. How often are players coached to not stop playing until they hear the umpire's call?

On top of that, you want that runner to intentionally place their teammate in jeopardy by moving into the path of the defender's "throwing lane" (still cannot find that in the rule book) which IS an act of INT which will undoubtedly be called. Oh wait, that's right, you want them to determine that some 60' away. I guess you expect them to read the mind of the defender with the ball to know which way to veer. Tell me, when do the coaches practice the "veering" mechanic so the players know what to do when they are supposedly out and should concede the base?

Maybe that is because it is the coach's responsibility to teach the players how to play the game. BTW, this isn't something new. The method of playing and the rules have been the same for more than 80 years.
IMO/IME, teaching players how to slide and coaching them to slide on close plays is much easier than trying to teach them how to disappear and has the added advantage of giving them the best chance of arriving quickly and safely while also keeping them safe from physical harm. Not that an advanced concept for those progressing beyond tball.
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
35,605
Messages
525,618
Members
16,647
Latest member
tamss13
Top