Whats the proper ruling?

[ech92]

First off let me start by saying I'm not whining or complaining and this didn't have much bearing on the tournament results. Playing indoor qualifier, time limit is 1 hour drop dead but finish the batter! Here is the set up; visiting team is up 1 run, home team batting, lead off batter gets on, during the next batter time expires, girl on base is now on 2nd, batter has 2 strikes, on the next pitch runner takes off, batter swings & misses, catcher drops ball & it gets behind her ( we now have a 3rd drop strike ), catcher chases batter to first but eventually throws ball to 1st & gets the first out, about a second later runner scores, ump says run counts tie ball game! The other team argued and eventually the TD over turns the decision. This chanes seeding for several teams. What is the correct call for future reference? The argument they had to change the call was that once the batter was out that ended the inning. Something seems wrong with this in my mind, why wouldn't the play have to be completed to its entirety?

 

[AndrewGeorge]

Just my opinion here but I would have to think finish the batter would be the same as finish the entire play (in this case the runner scoring would count as the play does not simply stop when the batter / runner is thrown out at first). This takes me back to the old recreation days when the last batter of the inning is up and you tell the girls on the bases to just keep running no matter what. Eventually the defense learns that if the ball is in the hands of the catcher then none of the runners were able to score. The coach of the visiting team should have done a better job of making sure his players knew that the runner making it safely to first does not hurt them at all as long as the runner doesn't score.

 

[coachjwb]

Of course there is no real rule on this since drop dead and finish the batter don't exist in any rule book ... but, if you ask me, the finish the batter should be interpreted as finish the play (just like Andrew said). What if the batter had been out at second instead on a non-force play .. would have that made any difference? It shouldn't. I can see the opposing argument for sure, but I would have ruled differently. Of course, it would have been altogether different if there had been 2 outs.

 

[Heavy Hitter]

I see it going either way. But the rules they were playing by were 1 hr time limit finish the batter (not the play). When the batter got out the game was over.

 

[coachjwb]

Heavy Hitter ... just for fun ... let me ask a question ... what if the batter had been safe at first and the run scored a second later ... would you see that differently?

 

[KillingMeSmalls]

IMO since it is drop dead format, the final batter is essentially considered the potential third out. How would you have ruled this same play if it was the third out of an inning? I think their reasoning was that since the batter struck out and was forced out at first base, the inning ended at that point. Whether the run crossed before or after would be irrelevant since it was a force out at first base; thus ending the half inning.

 

[coachjwb]

If it was the 3rd out, I totally agree. But I don't see final batter as the 3rd out ... she's just the final batter and the rules that apply to less than 3 outs should apply here. In this case, the home team didn't actually have any outs and was already disadvantaged by being the home team. If the defensive team had to make a play to get the out, then it seems like the offensive team should get an opportunity to finish the play ... but again, I truly can see both sides.

 

[Fairman]

Interesting...
The strict interpretation would be as Heavy has stated but it is much more keeping within the rules of softball to finish the play.

In a regular game the run would have scored to tie the game and there would have been one out; bases empty. In a regular game the defense could have made a decision to let the batter make it to first (or second) but prevent the runner from scoring. This is a lot of high level thinking that would be surprising at most age groups (and coaches).

I'd rather the rule would read 'Finish the batter and finish the play' to be more clear, avoid an appeal to the TD and mimic more closely a regular softball game.

 

[ech92]

I totally agree it should be finish the play as did the ump calling the game. Heres the kicker, the TD himself was unsure what to do ( his tournament so he should have made the decision ) so he called a buddy ( a buddy whom was not at this tournament and not affiliated with it ) and asked his opinion and they decided once batter was out, play was over.
Hopefully it was a lesson learned for TD and he words it better in the future. It did suck to find out at 10:00 at night that they decided we lost instead of tying and changed our seed and who we played.

 

[Heavy Hitter]

Heavy Hitter ... just for fun ... let me ask a question ... what if the batter had been safe at first and the run scored a second later ... would you see that differently?

Not fair asking another hard question. If batter/runner was safe and the ball wasn't in the circle then I would say the run would count. Because if the ball was not in the circle then the batter/runner could still advance to the next base. This a situation the TD should have been prepared for and had an answer ready.

 

[FastBat]

What age? I would say as soon as batter is out, game is over.

 

[ech92]

16u but I would tend to disagree with you. In the spirit of the game they should finish the play, jmo.

 

[BretMan2]

I think that the first answer you got is the right answer. Since these are "made up" rules that don't exist in any rule book, then it would be interpreted however the person who invented the rule says it is.

But that still doesn't prevent anyone from offering their opinion!

My opinion would be to complete the play. My preference would be to complete the inning. I'm no fan of time limits, but I really hate "drop dead" time limits. To me, it's fundamentally unfair to not allow one team the full at-bat, full opportunity to score, and same number of outs that the other team had.

If you're looking at these games as scrimmages, a chance to have some fun, improve your game, and play some softball in the dead of winter, then it really doesn't matter where they cut it off. But as soon as winning matters...now all of a sudden it's kind of important!

 

[daboss]

I think that the first answer you got is the right answer. Since these are "made up" rules that don't exist in any rule book, then it would be interpreted however the person who invented the rule says it is.

But that still doesn't prevent anyone from offering their opinion!

My opinion would be to complete the play. My preference would be to complete the inning. I'm no fan of time limits, but I really hate "drop dead" time limits. To me, it's fundamentally unfair to not allow one team the full at-bat, full opportunity to score, and same number of outs that the other team had.

If you're looking at these games as scrimmages, a chance to have some fun, improve your game, and play some softball in the dead of winter, then it really doesn't matter where they cut it off. But as soon as winning matters...now all of a sudden it's kind of important!

I knew your words of wisdom would clear this up.Great explanation!

 

[Maxdad]

Ahhh....the joys of indoor winter ball. TD would have to be able to see into the future to have an answer for this scenario in advance. Played lots of indoor with drop dead finish the batter and never thought to ask what the ruling would be if this situation came up at the end of the game.

Should be glad you didn't "revert back" because the inning wasn't complete when time ran out. You have to take indoor winter ball for what it is...indoor winter ball.

 

[Rdsherman5]

I was the TD for this tournament. As Maxdad mentioned, I never thought of the situation that arose. I have used the rule for 3 years of tournaments and Winter Leagues (approximately 300 games) and had never had a problem. Since that situation happened I have thought of a multitude of equally troublesome scenarios. [I agree with BretMan2 (and I assume everyone else) that time limits stink. But when you pay for fields by the hour they are a pretty good idea.] Any time you have to use "drop dead" it is a potential problem. Does the game end immediately when the time runs out; or when the at-bat is finished; or when the final play is completed; or when the ball is in possession of a defensive player (you can't spedify catcher) at home plate; or something else? It is a conundrum.

 

[ech92]

Its like I said, this was more of a question of what everyone thinks should have happened or happen in the future and not complaining ( not too much anyway )! That ending just didn't sit well with me and still doesn't, I would hope in the future if someone uses a drop dead rule and allows the batter to finish their at bat that it also allows the entire play to finish. Like everyone says, drop dead sucks but is a necessary evil for indoor but at the same time finish the batter and the last play is more in line with the spirit of the game.

 

[Fairman]

Had the same thing happen to us...kinda-of.

Last batter in a 'finish the batter' tourney in NC.
Easy come-backer to the pitcher who threw out the batter at first.
The umpires walked-off the field.
The runner at second trotted around the bases and came home.
When the game results were posted they had an extra run.
We didn't make the cut because of formula using runs allowed etc and were shut-out of the Sunday games.
When I complained to the TD that the umpires walked off the field and they didn't see the if the runner touched home and my players and I assumed the game was over: I was blown off.
Went home a day early; swearing never to play in 'finish the batter' tournament again.

 

[27gmoney27]

Here's one that happened in practice yesterday, so we were curious. Batter bunts, drops bat in playing field which impedes crashing players from making play (ball not double-touched). Is the batter safe or out?

 

[BretMan2]

Here's one that happened in practice yesterday, so we were curious. Batter bunts, drops bat in playing field which impedes crashing players from making play (ball not double-touched). Is the batter safe or out?

Batters are allowed to drop their bat and, when they do, the discarded bat becomes part of the playing field. The defense has to work around it.

I'm having a hard time picturing this. When a batter bunts they usually drop their bat in the vicinity of home plate. That fielder must have really been crashing! Possibly because it was practice and they knew a bunt was coming? I don't normally see fielders get that close in real games.

If the batter threw the bat some distance, to where it was heading at the fielder, or if the umpire judged that the batter purposely threw her bat toward a fielder, then you might have a case for interference. But a normal bunt where the batter just taps the ball and drops the bat? I'm not seeing inference there.