Fielder's choice or hit (again)

FC is correct.

(Though at ages 12 and below, I used to call it a hit anyway! I never liked to see a Little Leaguer lose a hit that way.)

quote:

Originally posted by Midlo Dad:
FC is correct.

(Though at ages 12 and below, I used to call it a hit anyway! I never liked to see a Little Leaguer lose a hit that way.)

Its easy to see you’re a sensitive guy!

Over the years I’ve seen a lot of people scoring games feel the same way and do the same thing, but the truth is, its wrong. Yeah, I know most people think there’s really no harm in it, but the fact is, it’s a rule, and isn’t part of teaching kids to play the game, teaching them the rules?

Trust me, I’ve made my share of compassionate mis-scores, and there’s never been a single time I didn’t regret it. In fact, just his week I did something I was absolutely positive was incorrect, but the circumstances were such that I didn’t see any great harm in it.

HS game, bottom of the 7th with the visitors winning 12-5. The visitors had scored 4 runs in the top of the inning, on 4 hits and no errors. The home team had scored 2 runs in the bottom of the 7th and there were 2 outs, when the umps called the game because of darkness. By rule, the entire 7th is disregarded, but I thought what the heck, it’s a non-conference game and can not come into any possible tie breakers, so why not give the players what they earned.

The next game the HC asked me if I knew what the rule was, and I told him yes I did. He didn’t tell me to remove the 7th inning stats, but I did. I didn’t make any excuses, but I did apologize for the error, because I knew better. As an SK, I’m not in the business of making kids fell good or bad, but just to report the game as it unfolds. I forgot that for a second and couldn’t have felt worse.

But the sad part is, although the coach and I understood what was going on, you’d have thought the world had come to an end the way some folks were acting! For one boy, it would have been his first hit of the season. For another, his name would have been in the paper as a top hitter because he’d have been 3X5. A couple players lost their 1st RBI of the year, and one lost his 1st SB.

And I heard about each one of those things from their parents, plus I also got a big thank you from the parent of our last pitcher who’d given up 2 ERs in the 7th, on 4 hits, and had left 2 runners on when the game was called.

The thing was, not one player cared a lick! It was only the parents who gave a rat’s patoo.

I'd have to disagree with you on this one and score it as a base hit.

Not sure what the Fed rules say, but OBR defines a FIELDER'S CHOICE as: "the act of a fielder who handles a fair grounder and, instead of throwing to first base to put out the batter-runner, throws to another base in an attempt to put out a preceding runner.

In the scenario described, it wasn't a grounder -- which itself would eliminate the FC option.

Beyond that... yes, he threw to 2nd. But it doesn't sound like it was done "INSTEAD OF throwing to 1st base to put out the batter-runner".

Admittedly, that last point is probably arguable, because it gets into the intent of the fielder and the intent of the rule.

But bottom line, I'd score this one a hit every time and feel justified in doing so.

quote:

Originally posted by RPD:
I'd have to disagree with you on this one and score it as a base hit.

Not sure what the Fed rules say, but OBR defines a FIELDER'S CHOICE as: "the act of a fielder who handles a fair grounder and, instead of throwing to first base to put out the batter-runner, throws to another base in an attempt to put out a preceding runner.

In the scenario described, it wasn't a grounder -- which itself would eliminate the FC option.

Beyond that... yes, he threw to 2nd. But it doesn't sound like it was done "INSTEAD OF throwing to 1st base to put out the batter-runner".

Admittedly, that last point is probably arguable, because it gets into the intent of the fielder and the intent of the rule.

But bottom line, I'd score this one a hit every time and feel justified in doing so.

No way is it a hit. While normally that particular action wouldn't be considered a grounder, in this situation it is a grounder in my opinion. On a different but similar topic, if a batter hits a ball to right and it bounces but the rightfielder fields it and throws the runner out at first, is that considered a groundout? I'll admit upfront, I'm no scorekeeper, but I would think the same logic would follow on the play mentioned in this topic.

quote:

Originally posted by RPD:
Not sure what the Fed rules say, but OBR defines a FIELDER'S CHOICE as: "the act of a fielder who handles a fair grounder and, instead of throwing to first base to put out the batter-runner, throws to another base in an attempt to put out a preceding runner.

In the scenario described, it wasn't a grounder -- which itself would eliminate the FC option.

Beyond that... yes, he threw to 2nd. But it doesn't sound like it was done "INSTEAD OF throwing to 1st base to put out the batter-runner".

Admittedly, that last point is probably arguable, because it gets into the intent of the fielder and the intent of the rule.

But bottom line, I'd score this one a hit every time and feel justified in doing so.

You’ve got all kinds of things goin’ on here, but you have to look at everything in the book that pertains to the situation.

First of all, you need to see if “grounder is better defined anyplace.

2006 OBR rule 2.00 A GROUND BALL is a batted ball that rolls or bounces close to the ground.

That pretty much defines even a ball that goes into the outfield but lands, as a grounder. So by that, your first argument is pretty well lost.

Now lets look at someplace else in OBR to see if we can clear this up even more.


2006 OBR rule 10.06
A base hit shall not be scored in the following cases:
(a) When a runner is forced out by a batted ball, or would have been forced out except for a fielding error;

That pretty much drives the nail in the coffin.

Now let’s see what NFHS says about it, if anything.

[I]2007 NFHS 9-3-2 … A base hit is credited to a batter when he advances to 1st base safely:
a. because of his fair hit (rather than because of a fielder’s error);
1. it is not a base hit if any runner is out on a force play caused by the batter advancing toward first base. /[I]

That should pretty much put a lid on it.

Hopefully you will no longer have any question about this particular call, but if you do, just remember, when you look at the rule book, you have to remember that there are a lot of things in it that you have to look in more than just one place to get the best answer, and sometime its necessary to look into the case books for the proper interpretation.

Also, you need to make sure you have not only the correct rule book, but the most current one. FI, the 2006 NFHS book had virtually the same language, but it was listed as an “EXCEPTION” to a rule, rather than a rule.

Pretty solid rebuttal, SK. I yield, based on 10.06. That makes it pretty black & white.

Not that it matters now, but I think whether or not it fits the definition of a "grounder" is not so clear cut.

Glad you're here to straighten out us amateurs. Keep up the good info.

Pretty solid rebuttal, SK. I yield, based on 10.06. That makes it pretty black & white.

Not that it matters now, but I think whether or not it fits the definition of a "grounder" is not so clear cut.

Glad you're here to straighten out us amateurs. Keep up the good info.
-----------------------------7

Pretty solid rebuttal, SK. I yield, based on 10.06. That makes it pretty black & white.

Not that it matters now, but whether or not it fits the definition of a "grounder" is not as clear cut.

Thanks for straightening up us amateurs. Keep up the good info.