I love it when we get to the point of a rules discussion where it breaks down into nah nah nah na na na.
When can a runner steal?
- Thread starter case20
- Start date
Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch
Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.
I merely showed how the rule could be clearer to rebut your false claim.
BTW, changing the wording to improve clarity doesn't make it a different rule - it's only an editorial change. Rational people recognize when things can be improved and act on it. Others like the status quo so they can act like a big shot and insult people for not understanding the rules as written.
To Umpires credit it is good to have an official admit that there is a widespread deficiency within their ranks. Something we have suspected for quite some time. 
Last edited:
If you don't think what you said is a rule change, then you don't understand the rule. It's as simple as that. You are proposing requiring something that isn't required, at least not in this country. Canada is another story.
Greenmonsters
Wannabe Duck Boat Owner
I believe we have a new leader in the Grumpiest Umpire category. Some of the vets will need to step up their game.
Please educate us because my understanding is as Comp described (see below).
- How do you determine whether the pitcher has taken the signal or appeared to do so? Would it be an IP if they only looked down at their feet?
- What stops a pitcher from walking through the pitcher's plate as long as they have both feet on it at the same time with the hands separated?
You are 100% correct. It would be too simple to state that the pitcher must assume a position with both feet on the rubber, with their hands apart and pause for 2 seconds. But no, some rules wonk had to dork up the message.
- Nov 8, 2014
- 182
- 0
You said.....Likewise, since people are talking about the double-base in another thread, why does it refer to "force" outs at 1st base? There are no force outs at 1st base because the batter-runner is never forced to advance if she doesn't want to. Only forced runners create force outs.
Same goes for the runner at first? They don't have to leave first base on a base hit if they choose not to as well. Perhaps I am missing your point.
Same goes for the runner at first? They don't have to leave first base on a base hit if they choose not to as well. Perhaps I am missing your point.
It's a technicality, a glitch in the way the rules are written, a minor point that people like to trot out to demonstrate their superior knowledge of the rules.
By the strict rule book definition of a force out, you can only have one against a runner who is already on base when the batter becomes a batter-runner (ie: when something happens that allows the batter to advance to first base, like a fair batted ball or an uncaught third strike).
Why is the rule written that way? Beats me, it just is. There are plenty of rules whose application depends on the status of the player. Are they a batter, a batter-runner, or a runner? There are separate sections in the rule book that deal with each one of those and a rule that applies to one doesn't necessarily apply to the others.
So, no you can't have a force out at first, at least not by the strict interpretation of the rule. But for all practical purposes, putting out the batter at first base has the same effect and end result as putting out a runner on a force out. People generically refer to this as a force out and, sometimes, the rule book itself even uses "force out" to describe this play. I suspect it does just as a kind of a shorthand way to get a point across and avoid a long-winded explanation...like this one!
Last edited:
- Jun 22, 2008
- 3,438
- 48
IMO, it is written in that manner because runners are never forced TO a base, but are forced FROM a base when another runner/batter-runner gains the right to that base. Since the BR has yet to attain the right to a base, s/he cannot be forced to leave.
