on a "sure double play" ball hit to the 2nd baseman. The runner realizes it is game over and lets the ball hit him. They say in scoring you can never assume the double play. (1) Runner is out, ball is dead, 2 outs, batter goes back to the plate to hit again? (2) Double play, game over? (3) something else, if so - what?
2007-06-27 17:09:08 · 9 answers · asked by Barry S 2 in Sports ➔ Baseball
In the normal unintentional situation, the runner is out and the batter is awarded first. But by MLB rule 7.09 e , if a runner intentionally interferes with a batted ball to prevent a double play, then he and the batter are both out. Here it would be assumed he is trying to prevent a double play.
Here's the quote: "e) If, in the judgment of the umpire, a base runner willfully and deliberately interferes with a batted ball or a fielder in the act of fielding a batted ball with the obvious intent to break up a double play, the ball is dead. The umpire shall call the runner out for interference and also call out the batter-runner because of the action of his teammate."
Edit, reply to david w -I disagree. The key in 7.09e is "the obvious intent to break up the double play", and that was the clear intent. That rule says the runner is to be called out for interference-this is not a retired runner. "Obvious intent" is not mentioned 7.09 d, which is the rule that refers to the retired runner.
And if the runner could prevent double plays by preventing the ball from reaching the fielder, this would be done a lot, especially if the ball wasn't hit so hard it that was too dangerous. But it doesn't happen.
2007-06-27 17:20:17 · answer #1 · answered by DaM 6 · 8⤊ 0⤋
Actually the correct ruling is runner out batterrunner awarded first base for the interference and credited with a base hit. The obvious intent to break up a double play only applies with a retired runner sliding into the fielder making the pivot or with a runner stealing the base and interfering with the chance the fielder had to catch the ball.
It is intentional but only one out can be given the way the play is described because you exactly cannot assume the double play nor can you assume the fielder would have fielded the ball and gotten anyone out (umpire's nightmare).
2007-06-27 22:11:15 · answer #2 · answered by david w 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
1 is almost correct. Its correct except that the batter does not go back to bat again. He is given first base. So there would be 2 outs runner on first and the next batter up.
2007-06-27 17:12:14 · answer #3 · answered by creggz12 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Craig is right - The relevant rules are
6.08(d), which states that a batter is entitled to first base if the batted ball hits a runner; and
7.08(f), which states the runner is out and the ball is dead.
The link below has the full text of the rules, if you're interested.
2007-06-27 17:23:50 · answer #4 · answered by JerH1 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
As soon as the ball hits the runner, the play would be declared dead and the batter given first base.
It's covered under Rule 7.08 F.
EDIT - Dana is correct, and I am wrong. Rule 7.09 would take precedence in this situation.
2007-06-27 17:18:18 · answer #5 · answered by Craig S 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Lead runner is out for interference. Batter advances to first. Next batter approaches plate.
2007-06-27 17:18:44 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i believe the run everyone is refering to is toward a runner going out of his way to the base to obstruct the defensive player. as long as the runner didnt run backwards there couldn't be any persedent as he was obstructing the field of play. runner would be out and batter would get first.
2007-06-27 17:38:06 · answer #7 · answered by Mike H 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't have too much to add other than to say that Dana M hit it right on the head and certainly deserves best answer.
2007-06-27 17:25:09 · answer #8 · answered by helloeveryone 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
umm then the game is over..its raining â«
2007-06-27 17:11:42 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋