Throw Hits the On Deck Batter

[ArmWhip]

Runner on second, batter hits a line drive to right field. Outfielder comes up throwing to first for the force out. The throw is low and skips by the first baseman, caroms off the fence, hits the on deck batter (she's 3 ft from the fence) and continues behind home plate. Catcher collects the ball as the runner from second scores. When the play is over I ask for time and go out to talk to the umpire about the ball contacting the on deck batter. First he says she was in the on deck circle which is nowhere near where she was. Then he says he didn't see the contact but that he would go talk to the base umpire who was out by second base. They both say they didn't see the contact. I'm sure plate ump saw the contact and used the on deck circle as immunity for the on deck batter, then changed his story. But that's beside the point. I'm thinking that it should be a dead ball with the runners being returned to their last base before the contact, but it could be a live ball with the on deck batter having the same immunity as a base coach.

 

[marriard]

.... I'm thinking that it should be a dead ball with the runners being returned to their last base before the contact, but it could be a live ball with the on deck batter having the same immunity as a base coach.

Well they both said the ball didn't see the ball touch the on-deck batter so there is no call. I know you suspect one is not bring truthful - hopefully that really isn't the case.

But yes, if a thrown ball hits the on-deck batter then the ball is immediately dead and runners are returned to the last touched base at the time of interference (no out recorded) unless the interference stopped the defense making a play or there was intent to interfere where the runner closest to home will be out. NFHS 7.5.4, USSSA 7.1.D.1, 7.1.D.Note

Also the on-deck circle is not some magical non-interference zone. It is irrelevant to this call.

 

[The Man In Blue]

I don’t know that I would jump to just returning the runners under NFHS or USSSA. Here is NFHS’s wording (USSSA is virtually the same):

Rule 7 Batting
SECTION 5 ON-DECK BATTER
Art. 4 . . . The on-deck batter shall not commit interference with the defensive team.
PENALTIES: (Art. 4)
1. When the interference is with a thrown or pitched ball, the ball is dead and the runner closest to home is declared out. If no play is obvious, no player is out, but runners shall return to the last base touched at the time of interference.

Per the OP, the ball caromed off the fence, hit the on-deck batter, and then ricocheted behind home plate where the catcher had to go get it. The right fielder made a play at the plate ... it may not have been a well-executed play, but it was a play.


USA Softball:
Rule 7 - Batting
Section 1 - On-Deck Batter
D. The on-deck batter may not interfere with a defensive player’s opportunity to make an out.

So in USA Softball it would come down to whether the umpire thought the defense had an actual chance at getting the runner out.

 

[Comocoach]

I don’t know that I would jump to just returning the runners under NFHS or USSSA. Here is NFHS’s wording (USSSA is virtually the same):

Rule 7 Batting
SECTION 5 ON-DECK BATTER
Art. 4 . . . The on-deck batter shall not commit interference with the defensive team.
PENALTIES: (Art. 4)
1. When the interference is with a thrown or pitched ball, the ball is dead and the runner closest to home is declared out. If no play is obvious, no player is out, but runners shall return to the last base touched at the time of interference.

Per the OP, the ball caromed off the fence, hit the on-deck batter, and then ricocheted behind home plate where the catcher had to go get it. The right fielder made a play at the plate ... it may not have been a well-executed play, but it was a play.


USA Softball:
Rule 7 - Batting
Section 1 - On-Deck Batter
D. The on-deck batter may not interfere with a defensive player’s opportunity to make an out.

So in USA Softball it would come down to whether the umpire thought the defense had an actual chance at getting the runner out.

It wasn't a play at the plate. It was a put out attempt at first, and a bad throw.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

 

[sluggers]

The right fielder made a play at the plate ... it may not have been a well-executed play, but it was a play.

You misread the OP.

The OP says:

​

Outfielder comes up throwing to first for the force out. The throw is low and skips by the first baseman, caroms off the fence​

After ball passes 1B, there is no attempt at a play.

So, runners should go to base where they were when ball struck on-deck batter.

 

[The Man In Blue]

Yep ... I read right past that! Thank you guys!

 

[Comp]

Why would this be a dead ball? The on deck batter did nothing to interfere and was hit by a wild throw. By rule the on deck batter is allowed to be on the field, just the same as the base coaches. Being hit by an errant throw is nothing, unless they interfere with a play. I can find nothing in the rules or case plays which would indicate this is anything other than a live ball.

 

[marriard]

Why would this be a dead ball? The on deck batter did nothing to interfere and was hit by a wild throw. By rule the on deck batter is allowed to be on the field, just the same as the base coaches. Being hit by an errant throw is nothing, unless they interfere with a play. I can find nothing in the rules or case plays which would indicate this is anything other than a live ball.

USSSA10.1.G,2 or NFHS 5.1.1.G (Dead Ball/Suspension of Play)
A pitch or any other thrown ball;
2. is touched by nonparticipating team personnel;

 

[Comp]

The on deck batter didnt touch the ball, the ball hit them. Big difference. This is no different than a thrown ball hitting a base coach, unless they did something to interfere with the play this is simply a live ball. As I said, there is nothing in the rules or case plays that say this is anything but a live ball. By rule the on deck batter is allowed to be on the field, but just as with the base coaches they cannot interfere with a play. Nothing in the original post would indicate the on deck batter did anything to interfere.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

[marriard]

The on deck batter didnt touch the ball, the ball hit them. Big difference. This is no different than a thrown ball hitting a base coach, unless they did something to interfere with the play this is simply a live ball. As I said, there is nothing in the rules or case plays that say this is anything but a live ball. By rule the on deck batter is allowed to be on the field, but just as with the base coaches they cannot interfere with a play. Nothing in the original post would indicate the on deck batter did anything to interfere.

The word 'touch' is used extensively in this rule in lots of the sections - and in most cases it is does not imply intent of any kind or require interference call. I am not sure why this one clause would have a different meaning to the same word. If they wanted to say 'interfere they should say it.

Even in this one section there is 'touching a spectator and 'touching loose equipment directly before and after in both rules codes (the wording in both is clearly copied from one to the other).

I guess you could argue that the on-deck batter is 'participating team personnel but I think that is a real stretch as well and lacks definition in the rule book. I would argue that a base coach falls under participating.

But then you can get to the rule which says they are meant to stay in the on-deck circle unless guiding a player home (7.5.3.)... so if she wasn't doing that when the call hit her would that then be interference of some kind. It is not like there is a penalty assigned to not following 7.5.3.