 |
Author |
TOPIC: How would you handle this situation |
|
| Neal
December 14, 2013
12:07:26 PM
Entry #: 4108280
| Guys, curious saw this on another website was wondering how you would handle this situation.
We are on defense. Runner on 3rd. 1 out. Batter at plate has a 0-1 count. 2nd pitch batter offers to bunt. As the ball enters zone she does not bunt the ball but does drop the bat at home plate and runs to 1st (and eventually to 2nd). Our catcher did not glove the ball cleanly in an attempt to avoid the bat being dropped by her. She picks up the ball in front of her, rises up and steps out in front of the plate looking at the batter oddly for departing on no hit as if it were D3. She later told me she was baffled because the coaches were yelling "run" to the batter as if it were a D3. She wanted to throw the ball to 1st but knew the count was only 0-1 so she did not. In all the confusion the runner on 3rd came in behind her and steps on home plate.
Umpire's ruling. Batter was brought back to complete her at bat. 1 strike on her for offering so now she has a 1-1 count. Runner on third scores. I asked why the runner was not placed back on 3rd as the batter had not hit the ball, been HBP, been walked or encountered a D3. Furthermore the ball was not a passed ball. It just seemed like a trick to confuse the catcher by drawing her attention towards the batter so the 3rd base runner could sneak in home. Would this not be dead ball and all is placed back as is for batter to complete her at bat? I really do not know what is right here which is why I am asking. We have never experienced this which I ask. We did end up with the win 5-4 but this play was just weird all around and I was wondering if as a coach I am missing out on the rules somehow or should be considering this as a tactic. Seems kind of bush league if you ask me but we will now have to prepare to defend this kind of stuff.
|
|
| Mike
December 15, 2013
5:34:27 PM
Entry #: 4108356
| Being that the catcher did not throw the ball and "knew" it was not a D3 I would rule along with the game umpire that the run scores and the batter continues her at bat with an 0-2 count since the count was 0-1 and he said she offered to make it strike 2.
|
|
| Nov
December 16, 2013
3:26:10 AM
Entry #: 4108386
| Neal - Mike is correct as was the game umpire. [also on the count, you typo'd it... count was 0-1 so a strike makes it 0-2 as Mike stated, not 1-1]. catcher should have paid attention to the runner on 3rd - you say she knew it wasn't a D3 so she should've played it like that and tagged runner coming home. ball is not dead - can't be. while coaches are telling batter to run, other coaches should be telling catcher don't throw - tag runner! it may be bush but it's part of the game. only thing i might offer is your statement that your catcher didn't catch the ball clean b/c she was avoiding the bat which was dropped. that implies the bat was dropped before the ball reached the plate since if bat dropped after then you cannot blame the bat for causing the misplayed ball. in this case you'd have interference possibly. judgement. then rule accordingly. from the sound of it though the catcher had the ball in plenty of time to make a play on the runner trying to score so i'd agree with Mike & the calling umpire
|
|
| neal
December 20, 2013
7:52:59 AM
Entry #: 4108747
| yes, my typo, should be strike 2. Does everyone agree with the answers so far or would you handle it differently?
|
|
| neal
December 31, 2013
1:00:01 PM
Entry #: 4109242
| Fuel for thought?
Nov, couldn't you ruled Interference on this?
Interference is the act of an offensive player or team member that impedes, hinders or confuses a defensive player attempting to to execute a play. Interference may in the form of physical contact, verbal distraction, visual distraction, or any type of distraction that hinders a fielder in the execution of a play. Defensive players must be given the opportunity to field the ball anywhere on the playing field or throw the ball without being hindered. Guys i have interference!!! Batter out runner returned to third
My main point in this interference definition is consuse. as the offensive is deliberately trying to confuse the defense.
|
|
| Mike
January 1, 2014
9:02:10 PM
Entry #: 4109299
| I had thought about interference on the play but, the defensive player was not hindered at an attempt to make a play and the catcher was given the opportunity to field the ball. From the description you give the catcher had ample opportunity to tag out the runner coming in from third base.
|
|
| neal
January 2, 2014
1:59:58 PM
Entry #: 4109339
| definition is impede, hinder or confuse.
correct she didn't impede or hinder. BUT
she definetally tried to confuse
|
|
| RKB
January 2, 2014
3:28:28 PM
Entry #: 4109348
| So conversely, should it be obstuction on the defense if they run a trick play to get a runner off a base and tag them? A fake throw, pretending to have missed a catch and the fielders all running like they are getting the ball etc?
Defense should be aware of the count and situation and know there was no play to be made on the batter/runner.
|
|
| Neal
January 10, 2014
3:10:44 PM
Entry #: 4110145
| Interference is impede, hinder or confuse
Obstruction is just impede.
|
|
| Nov
February 21, 2014
5:21:13 PM
Entry #: 4114500
| neal, i'm still with mike on this - catcher had the ball, could have tagged the runner coming from 3rd. if she 'knew' there were only 2 strikes, why did she watch the b-r going to 1st? i also stick with my assertion that the bat couldn't have interfered unless it was dropped as the pitch was on its way and not at the plate yet. [did this happen?] in which case the catcher did not make a clean catch if the batter thought it was strike 3 i understand her running. how often have we had batters [even in h.s.] stay in the box with 4 balls or 3 strikes or drop the bat & jog to 1st when ball 3 is called? it happens. RKB makes a good point as well
now, having not witnessed this, depending on the age & level [rec vs travel], i could see interference being called - but not on the b-r on the coaches for yelling to the b-r to 'run'. that could confuse the catcher if younger ages and/or rec ball. however, if that is the decision of the umpire then the b-r comes back to bat and the runner closest to home is out - the one at 3rd base who scored
great question
|
|
| Gary
February 27, 2014
10:10:44 AM
Entry #: 4115027
| I know I am chiming in late on this one. But intent should have nothing to do with the call. Correct?
Interference is the act of confusing or hindering the defense. I believe the batter by running to first and then second is an act to confuse the defense. The batter should know the count too. I say the batter is out and place the runner back at third.
|
|
| Opa
February 27, 2014
3:42:26 PM
Entry #: 4115069
| 1st, If the cather did not catch a ball weather it drops right in front or rolls to the backstop it is a passball. 2nd, Once the pitch is made, the runner on third had the right to come off the base. She has the right to score at that point. The ball never went back to the pitcher so she had no reason to have to go back. The players and coaches have to be in the game, Umpire is not resposable for them not noing the situation. The only way the run wouldnot score is if in the Umpires judgement there was interferance, then as Nov said rule accordingly. I agree the plate ump made the right call.
|
