On deck batter picks up ball

[findingtime]

R3 and R2 and no outs FED rules. So a ball ricochets off my shin guard hard towards the hitting dugout. The on deck batter picks up the ball. R3 would have scored easily and R2 move up. Call it dead and end up putting runners back but wondered if the runs should have scored. I can't find any help in my case book or rules that are specific to on deck batters.

[richvee]

There's no way I'm scoring the run. The on deck batter picking up a live ball is interference, so I'm not rewarding the offense. I'm wondering if you could have called R3 out as per 3-2-3 penalty.

ART. 3 . . ....nor shall the base coach or members of the team at bat fail to vacate any area needed by a fielder in his attempt to put out a batter or runner.

PENALTY: The ball is dead immediately and the runner is out. The batter-runner or runner may be out as in 7-4-1f and 8-4-2g. Other runners return as in 8-2-8.

[mturman]

There's no way I'm scoring the run. The on deck batter picking up a live ball is interference, so I'm not rewarding the offense. I'm wondering if you could have called R3 out as per 3-2-3 penalty.

ART. 3 . . ....nor shall the base coach or members of the team at bat fail to vacate any area needed by a fielder in his attempt to put out a batter or runner.

PENALTY: The ball is dead immediately and the runner is out. The batter-runner or runner may be out as in 7-4-1f and 8-4-2g. Other runners return as in 8-2-8.

Have to agree with Rich on this one...While I would have to consider what the runners are actually doing, they are likely to be put out for the interference...I am sure the comments would be there was no intent but that is moot...

Aloha,
Mike

[mbyron]

I'm probably not getting an out here. The defense screwed up first and would have allowed at least one run. And the INT did not prevent the defense from recording an out.

It's sufficient penalty IMO to put the runners back due to the teammate interference.

[scrounge]

I'm probably not calling anyone out if it's a youth or rec league game, especially on a field where the on-deck circle is all of 10 feet away and it's just some 9 yr old reacting and not thinking. But a high school game on a full-sized field? I'd be more inclined to call an out if there's even a chance of a play being made. If not, what are they interfering with other than subsequent play after the run? Putting everyone back seems sufficient.

I'm probably not getting an out here. The defense screwed up first and would have allowed at least one run. And the INT did not prevent the defense from recording an out.

It's sufficient penalty IMO to put the runners back due to the teammate interference.

[pluggy]

R3 is out R2 back to second:

Rule 5-1-1-e: Ball becomes dead immediately if there is interference by ..... or by any person.

Penalty on Dead Ball Table Activity 9 (interference by others connected with team) - Runner is Out. Other runners return.

On deck batter gets chewed out by OC nobody on that team will make that mistake again.

[bobjenkins]

R3 is out R2 back to second:

Rule 5-1-1-e: Ball becomes dead immediately if there is interference by ..... or by any person.

While that's true, interference is an act which "obstructs, hinders, confuses or impedes" the defense, and I don't see any evidence of that in the OP. I'm not saying it couldn't be that -- only that I think the question is dealing with when it isn't.

So, I think the correct reference is 5-1-1g.2 "is intentionally touched by a non-participating squad member". Since the ball becomes dead when it's touched, and there's no provision in 8-3 for awarding bases, I'd just return them.

[pluggy]

Bob - I could agree with a return of the runners depending on how it played out. If when the ball was loose the runners held at their base I could see not imposing a penalty. However if they were attempting to advance and there were the slightest possibility of the defense to make a play, I would impose it.

Again, depending on how it played out in real time with the benefit of the doubt going to the defense on this one.

[mbyron]

Again, depending on how it played out in real time with the benefit of the doubt going to the defense on this one.

I don't give the defense TOO much benefit of the doubt: they screwed up first, after all.

I'll call an out if the defense had a clear opportunity to make a play. I regard this as unlikely, since the runners would have been off once the pitch got by the catcher.

[pluggy]

Who screwed up first doesn't come into play. It's a live ball that the offense killed but we both do agree that if there was a play the defense will get the out.

[cajunyankee]

Who screwed up? Who screwed up first?

Why not who had on the worst-looking uniforms when the mistake was made?

I think many times we try and inject morality into our decisions. If there's a rule that needs to be employed and a situation that needs to be interpreted, do it.

Trying to decide who deserves what based on some set of criteria based on anything else is asking for trouble when you have to support your decision.

Just my penny or so.

[pluggy]

Who screwed up? Who screwed up first?

Trying to decide who deserves what based on some set of criteria based on anything else is asking for trouble when you have to support your decision.

Just my penny or so.

Well said +1

[mturman]

Who screwed up? Who screwed up first?

Why not who had on the worst-looking uniforms when the mistake was made?

I think many times we try and inject morality into our decisions. If there's a rule that needs to be employed and a situation that needs to be interpreted, do it.

Trying to decide who deserves what based on some set of criteria based on anything else is asking for trouble when you have to support your decision.

Just my penny or so.

Plus 1...Excellent comment and one that probably can resonate across all levels of play and locations.

I get sooo tired of hearing opinion from local veterans about rule issues...

Some may recall another post that shared a test drive video from ump-hub...One of the test drive videos was about who won the situation...The official declaring the factors he uses to make his call that are beyond teh actual situation...

Opinion is not a rule...Opinion offered as a rule is a disservice to our profession and those that play the game...Why is it done...Laziness??? Apathy??? Personal gain??? Who knows...

Ok, I am off the soap box...

Aloha,
Mike

[heyblue26]

If the on deck batter intentionally interferes with the ball I am calling Interference and I would return the runners back to the base that they were at the TOP.

[Rich_Ives]

If there's interference call it.

BUT

Read the definition of interference several times first. That's Bob Jenkins' point too.

[mcmahm34]

Who screwed up? Who screwed up first?

Why not who had on the worst-looking uniforms when the mistake was made?

I think many times we try and inject morality into our decisions. If there's a rule that needs to be employed and a situation that needs to be interpreted, do it.

Trying to decide who deserves what based on some set of criteria based on anything else is asking for trouble when you have to support your decision.

Just my penny or so.

+1 good reply

[bobjenkins]

If there's interference call it.

BUT

Read the definition of interference several times first. That's Bob Jenkins' point too.

Thanks, Rich.

I seem to recall a FED interp on this (or a similar) play in the past couple of years. I'll have to dig through my files to see if I can find it.

[jfernish]

Assuming the defense does not have a play, I would simply call Time, the instant the on deck batter touched the ball. Return the runners to last legally touched base. If runner from third scored before calling Time then score the run. Same for the runner from second base. If runner from third did not score before calling Time, return both runners to their bases time of pitch.
If both runners advanced before on deck batter touched the ball, why return them to their bases at time of pitch?

[mturman]

Assuming the defense does not have a play, I would simply call Time, the instant the on deck batter touched the ball. Return the runners to last legally touched base. If runner from third scored before calling Time then score the run. Same for the runner from second base. If runner from third did not score before calling Time, return both runners to their bases time of pitch.
If both runners advanced before on deck batter touched the ball, why return them to their bases at time of pitch?

Because, unfortunately for the offense, that is what the rule requires...Runners cannot advance on such an interference...

Aloha,
Mike

[bobjenkins]

Because, unfortunately for the offense, that is what the rule requires...Runners cannot advance on such an interference...

Aloha,
Mike

pffft. Under FED rules (as specified in the OP), runners return TOI (with the exception of FPSR, which this was not).

Even under OBR, runners return TOI "unless otherwise specified in these rules" (or some wording to that effect).

[mbyron]

pffft. Under FED rules (as specified in the OP), runners return TOI (with the exception of FPSR, which this was not).

Even under OBR, runners return TOI "unless otherwise specified in these rules" (or some wording to that effect).

And there is a version of this play where I would allow the runs to stand. Pitch gets away from F2 and rolls to a stop in front of the on deck hitter. Runners advance. F2 sees R2 stop at 3B and stops running for the ball. The action of the play is over.

Then the on deck hitter picks up the ball and flips it to F2, who is standing 5 feet away from him.

[Rich_Ives]

Because, unfortunately for the offense, that is what the rule requires...Runners cannot advance on such an interference...

Aloha,
Mike

They retutn to the TOI base - which may be an advanced base.