1

NCAA RULES INTERPRETATIONS

Sorted by Rule These interpretations are taken from official interpretations made by Dee Abrahamson and posted on web sites. A question from a specific year may refer to a rule number which matches the rule book edition for that year and may not match the current rule book.

Rule 1 Definitions

1.1 Altered bat Question: (3/27/08) Is it illegal to use paint or a sharpie-marker to put numbers or anything on the barrel of the bat? Answer: Yes. Numerous types of paint available have metallic content in them to improve performance. The rules do not allow repainting of any bat on the barrel for the simple reason that we cannot control performance if we allow it. Can you imagine if players could airbrush their favorite sayings or names on their bats with metallic, glow in the dark, or glitter paint? Those are obvious but what about the array of colored titanium paints or car paint with heavy metal ingredients now readily available...both to be brushed on and in pen styles to be written with? The rules committee cannot expect the umpire to discern the content of the paint used and then use their judgment that no advantage is gained on a batted ball. So to protect the integrity of the game and provide some assurance to the opposing team that there is no potential for an unfair advantage gained by a player who uses a bat with custom markings, the rules are quite clear that the only exception for marking bats is on the knob (1.1) where bat/ball contact is highly unlikely. What is considered the barrel? Just to be clear, the softball playing rules refer to the bat in three basic pieces...the knob, the handle and the barrel. The barrel is from the end cap to the nearest edge of the grip, the handle is the area covered by the grip and the knob is the piece perpendicular to the handle. For the purpose of the rules, we do not distinguish the tapering end of the barrel as the throat, the neck, the taper, the connection, the flex or any other of those slang terms because there is no need to distinguish that area from the sweet spot, center of percussion, antinodes, preferred hitting area or whatever you want to call it. There's no reason for getting that technical because the same rule applies to that entire portion of the bat. Only the barrel, knob and grip are distinguished because portions of the rules are specific to them (barrel 3.2.1.4; knob 3.2.1.7 and 12; handle 3.2.1.9). Interestingly, we can't even get the manufacturer's engineer and the same company's marketing man to use the same terminology for their own bat parts much less work for consensus among all coaches, players, umpires, scouts, salesmen, and manufacturers. But if you think it would help, we could put a diagram in the rule book identifying the three major sections! of a bat. As to the question about markings...rule 1.1 allows for marking for identification on the knob or laser etching other than on the barrel or replacing the grip. Any of

2

which can be done without rendering the bat altered. That infers that marking for identification on the barrel or laser etching on the barrel renders the bat altered and unsuitable for play.

1.36 Dugout Question: (3/7/06) The home team had heaters in their dugout but the visiting team did not. The questions were: 1. does this create and unfair advantage; 2. does the home team have to provide heaters to the visiting teams. Answer: There is nothing in the playing rule book that requires a home team to provide the same heaters, blankets or warm clothing to their visitors. In 5-3 there are some accommodations for visiting team pregame batting practice equipment and space but other than that coaches are left to their own sense of fair play or possible conference requirements (for example, most conferences have arrangements for a water cooler in not only the home team but also the visiting team dugout).

Rule 2 Field of play

2.23 Tarp

Question: (3/20/06) We are having a lot of discussion with the tarp stored on the field. The rule states that the fielder may not have either foot on the tarp. This allows the fielder to lean against the tarp and make a catch as long as neither foot is on the tarp. Please clarify if these are catches: The fielder has one foot on the ground and the other foot completely off the ground with her knee on the tarp. The fielder has both feet off the ground but neither is on the tarp. She makes the catch while her body is being completely supported by the tarp. Answer: In both the cases you describe, you have a catch because neither foot is on the tarp. Stepping on a tarp has always been discouraged because metal spikes can rip through tarp material and render a $5,000 tarp useless.

Question: (1/29/03) If a player falls on the tarp and catches the ball while both feet are off the ground and she is on the tarp is she not in dead ball territory therefore making this a no-catch? We understand that she cannot put a foot up on the tarp to catch before during or after the catch for safety reasons, but can she use the tarp as an advantage by leaving the ground with both feet and with a knee, knees, or lean up or on the tarp and use it to catch the ball? It seems we interpreted before that if she caught the ball and then went up on the tarp leaving the ground it was a catch and carry and if she at least kept one foot on the ground and did not put the a foot or feet up on the tarp (for safety and/or to use the tarp to their advantage) that they could catch the ball and the ball would remain live.

Answer: As to the tarp... unless a team locates it in dead ball territory (ie outside the fence or within a fenced area) essentially a player can do anything EXCEPT put a foot on it...she can use it to her advantage to make a catch by bracing or leaning...just can't put a foot on it. It is not dead ball territory so she can sprawl on the tarp, make a catch and then get up and throw the ball. If the ball becomes lodged in the tarp, then you do have a dead ball (blocked ball). If you have a catch and then the player puts a foot on the tarp, you have a dead ball (catch and carry).

3

Rule 3 Equipment and Uniforms

3.0 Opening section – “worn properly” Batting gloves Question: (9/18/07) A couple of years back the NCAA said all equipment had to be worn properly. Batting gloves had to be worn and could not be hanging out of the back pockets. No problem. What about players who carry them in their hands as they run the bases? Is this permissible or not? Some believe that is not to be allowed and others including some coaches, believe that it helps the players keep their fists clenched when running or stealing, helping to prevent a possible injury to the fingers. Answer: Yes, carrying batting gloves is okay and if you really want to use elastic logic that umpires love so much, you can use gloves are made for the hands so naturally holding them in the hands is okay! Lots of coaches, even in major league baseball, teach carrying them for injury prevention so you will see it quite a bit more I think. Question: (3/23/06) Batting Gloves hanging out of pockets. I've noticed that there is a lot more leeway given in enforcing this rule. It's most notable with defensive players. "Since, defensively, the intent of the rule is a moot point, what difference does it make if the gloves hang out?" How should this rule be interpreted since, indeed, defensively it makes no sense? I just want to get the official interpretation since we have had players question the umpires enforcing it on defense. Answer: As to the batting gloves, if you are seeing it as a trend, maybe reminding coaches in the pregame conference to have them tucked into those pockets would help. We included batting gloves in the intro of rule 3 because we had several situations where a ball deflected off a batting glove...whether a gloved dropped by a runner who was holding it in her hand and dropped it or a glove falling out of a pocket of an infielder. The penalty is just to enforce the appropriate blocked ball effect but rather than deal with that, the committee put it in the intro and tried to avoid an umpire having to rule on it (or a tag on a floppy glove on a head first slide). It seemed like the best thing to do because for some reason, we had it happen numerous times in the same year (much like the season we had numerous batted balls hit the rosin bag of their own pitcher who had left it on the field). Funny how things happen in bunches but I guess that's how we are motivated to make changes. Anyway, if you remind them to tuck them in whether on offense or defense, maybe it would help avoid having to make those base awards!

Sunglasses Question: (2/2/05) Aren't sunglasses designed to be worn on the face shielding the eyes? Answer: Okay so the sunglasses are a bit of a stretch but here's the problem. On a partly cloudy day, the furthest outfielder from the dugout has her glasses in place during the bright sunshine but then when the clouds roll in, she needs to run to the dugout to remove them so she can safely see in the outfield. Before the next pitch, the sun peaks out again so she calls time to get her glasses. She makes it back to her position and on the next pitch, needs another trip to the dugout. For safety reasons, there's nowhere on her body to safely store the sunglasses without possibility of breaking them when diving. So either we allow the game to be indefinitely delayed for strict application of the rule or we liberally allow them on the head where they can be safely

4

worn yet accessible without game delay. We've opted for the liberal interpretation but I admit it is not perfect. Kneepads Question: (2/2/05) Must kneepads be worn on the knee while at bat, running the bases, or on defense? Answer: Most kneepads are now marketed as knee/shin pads, designed to protect appendages from bruises or to protect current injuries from intensifying. We have a player who wears one on her forearm because her arm is larger than a traditional forearm pad (although i don't think you can tell the difference between a forearm, shin or knee pad). It appears that volleyball, soccer, football and softball pads have all been combined into protective padding in catalogs so unless you are sure a particular pad was not intended for the use it is getting, I think we should err on the side of player welfare and allow them to protect themselves.

3.2 Bats

3.2.1 Bat standards Question: (10/10/06) The question came up about wood bats and whether or not they will need the ASA 2004 certification stamp in 2009. How would you respond to that question? Answer: All bats in NCAA play must have the 2000 or 2004 seal so I suspect you will not see any wood bats in the game. They probably do meet the performance standard but my guess is most manufacturers did not pay for the right to use the seal because it is cost prohibitive. BUT if a wood bat has either seal and is not on the non-approved bat list, it is legal. (Rule 3-2a1 and 15)

3.2.1.9, 3.2.1.10 Handle and grip Question: (3/16/04) A legal bat has some type of material under the tape on the handle, other than a safety grip. It seems to be a rope or something that is spiraled around the handle under the tape that aids in gripping the bat. Logic would say that if it helps with the grip it could be a good safety feature but other coaches say that it enhances the players’ ability to grip the bat. This gives them an unfair advantage. Answer: I have always interpreted the rule that you can have a bat and the bat can have a grip (as per 3-2j) but that's it. You cannot tape a pad or the contoured fingers under the grip and now I'll have to add rope. Now with that said, you can have a continuous spiral (not solid layer) of tape that is "x"ed along the grip (ends up looking like diamonds on the bat handle) and then a second layer of continuous spiral, solid layer on top. That might create the illusion of rope but I suspect you can feel the difference because the tape would have "give" that the rope would not. So bottom line is that the bat should not be allowed if there is a substance under the allowable grip but if it is the tape itself (and not more than 2 layers), it would be okay.

5

3.2.1.15 ASA certification seal Question: (4/19/06) If a bat that is not listed on the non-approved bat list (and is legal in every other way - no chips, dents, or burrs) has its ASA certification worn off so that it cannot be read, does that make the bat illegal? Answer: The ASA certification mark must be visible for the bat to be legal.

3.2.5 Use of any treatment See question listed under 1.1 Altered Bat

3.6 Electronic equipment Question: (4/14/07) What is the official ruling of eligible substitute players in the dugout filming during a game? Are they excluded from anything except re-viewing the recorded information? I thought the only issue was re-viewing information that had been taped during the contest. I always thought anyone in the dugout could hold and record any part of the game. Answer: You are right. A player in the dugout may video tape during the game but she is prohibited from reviewing the tape until the game is over. Tough to police, I know but sometimes you just have to hope people can be honest. Or if the opposing coach is worried about it, he/she can have someone watch the filmer all game and bring violations to the umpire's attention. The filmer can participate in the game; the only thing that excludes folks is getting info from outside the team area and bringing it in so since she is there already, she is eligible to play. Question: (2/13/07) Home team has a ‘Juggs’ gun in the stands behind home plate and an injured player sitting in the stands monitoring it. During the game a fan noticed that the ‘Juggs’ gun had a cable attached to it that trailed into the home team dugout. Later it was discovered that at the end of the cord in the dugout was an LED digital readout of pitch speed. Granted, the injured player was not transmitting information to the dugout, but having the read out from the speed gun viewable in the dugout could be considered obtaining information from the stands. Answer: I think Rule 3, section 6b applies. It reads "Scouting information obtained from outside the dugout involving current opponents shall not be relayed or given to the playing field or to team personnel during the contest." Sounds like information was being relayed into the dugout via the LED readout and provided to team personnel. (See 5.6 for another question on uniformed team members out of dugout.)

3.7 Gloves/mitts Question: (3/13/07) At every tournament so far this year, I've told coaches to blacken or at least change the optic yellow color on their pitcher's gloves. No one has complained and they quickly marked out the optic yellow. I've based that ruling on 3.7.a which says: Gloves/mitts worn by players may not be the color of the ball but may be any combination of other colors. Last night as I was going over my notes it occurred to me that technically XXX State's pitcher's glove is illegal. Mizuno is making their glove orange and black to match their team colors. The book says

6

the pitcher's glove may be tan, brown, grey or black, or any combination of those colors. Is orange close enough to tan? Furthermore, the rule states no gloves may be the color of the ball, so I was technically wrong in only requiring the pitcher's to be marked out had that been true. I thought we had been told that the optic yellow on the pitcher's glove needed to be removed. I also noticed at another game that the team had a Wilson gloves with four optic yellow logos on their gloves. One of the logos is round, although it is only approximately 1.5 inches across on the outside of the webbing of the glove. Answer: First, as to the pitcher's glove. That player has stricter regulations as to color so when Worth came out with the white glove last year, it was okay for everyone except the pitcher who is restricted to any combination of the four colors listed. Likewise the patriotic red, white and blue glove we saw in 2003 is okay for field players but not the pitcher. I have not seen XXX State's gloves and there are no pictures on their website so I don't know if a reasonable person would say the glove is tan or orange but if the answer is the latter, then the pitcher cannot use that model. As to the logo color, all the rule book restricts is the glove color not the manufacturer's logo. Wilson, like several other companies, has made use of optic yellow stitching as much as they can as a marketing thing because it catches your eye. Several models have 4 or more logos so no matter what the position of the fielder or play, at least one logo is visible and legible in a photo. I went to Wilson's website to try to find a picture of the ZZZ glove you mention and couldn't find one so maybe it is a new model. But the NCAA does restrict logo size and number of logos on apparel but not on equipment so they are taking full advantage of the advertising space. That said though, you do have rule 10, section 13c which gives the umpire authority to have the yellow stitching colored in or taped over on the pitcher's glove IF you consider it distracting. I am sure that if you explain to the defensive coach that the logo is making it difficult for not only the batter but also you to see a strike that they will gladly color it in. It is certainly not in their best interest to have the plate umpire distracted and watching the logo instead of the ball! Question: (2/22/07) We had both pitchers from XXX and ZZZ use black markers to cover up the lettering on the outside of the mitt that is optic green/yellow and the color of the ball. We know that this lettering is small but you get flashes of what can be perceived to be the ball, without blacking out the lettering. What did we decide was ok with a yellow optic ball on the glove of the pitcher? Answer: The glove cannot be the color of the ball so a yellow optic ball on the glove would not be legal. The book does not address yellow stitching on the manufacturer's label though and we have done exactly what Ron suggests and had the player use a marker to darken the stitches or cover them with tape so as not to be distracting. Question: (3/23/06) A pitcher has a white fielder's glove with blue webbing and red stitching. First, is it illegal? And if it is illegal, do the umpires make her change gloves when she's pitching or do we wait for someone to appeal illegal equipment? You could make a weak argument that the "white" is really "grey" (off-white). But there's no denying the webbing is blue (navy). It apparently is not distracting since no opponent has said anything.

7

Answer: The pitcher's glove is illegal in that it does not conform to the limited choice of color. The effect of 3-7 does include if the pitcher makes a play, it can be nullified so it definitely can have an effect on the game. Even though the coaches are responsible for legally equipping their team and should know the rules (after all, this is not new..changed in 2003 from the original rule of one color or two tints of the same color so this glove you described has never been legal in NCAA play), it would be best if you or I contacted them to alert them.

3.8 Helmets

3.8.1 NOCSAE requirement

Question: (4/1/04) We have a request from a college regarding a player who was injured and would like to wear a hockey helmet with a face mask for protection of an injury while she is batting and running the bases. My initial response was that unless the helmet had the NOCSAE seal it would not be allowed. The school asked me if there was any way to "get a waiver" due to the circumstances of wanting to protect the player's injury. Is there any such provision for a waiver? Answer: There is no provision for anyone to set aside the requirement to wear a NOCSAE approved batting helmet because the legal liability would be astronomical. To substitute a piece of protective equipment which meets the needs of one sport to another could only occur if the manufacturer wanted to submit the equipment to NOCSAE to meet the standards of another sport and that takes time and money. So in the immediate future, their best bet is to use a NOCSAE approved batting helmet with an approved face guard while on offense and she can wear a face guard, paint ball mask or even the same batting helmet with face guard on defense if she chooses.

3.8.1 Removing helmet Question: (3/22/04) I have a question regarding the term 'actively running the bases' specifically in relation to the rule (3-8) regarding removing helmets. If the ball is in the circle and a runner in standing on a base, is she considered 'actively running the bases'? In other words, if the ball is in the circle and a runner is standing on a base, should she be called out if she removes her helmet to adjust her hair etc.? Answer: Once the ball is in the circle and no play is occurring, the batter, runner or on-deck player may remove her helmet (to adjust her hair, exchange helmets with another player, etc). Note: rule has been changed from 2004. Words “while actively running the bases” has been changed to “while the ball is live.”

3.8.4 Face mask Question: (1/27/06) Rule 3-8d reference that a face mask may be worn and states it should meet the NOCSAE standard. Can a mask that is worn offensively meet the NOCSAE standard and not display the NOCSAE approval and if so how would we know it was approved? Or is the interpretation of this mean that the mask must display NOCSAE Approved on it like in ASA and NFHS?

8

Answer: There really is a rule difference here. The NCAA rule is that the face mask should meet the NOCSAE standard FOR THE MASK AND HELMET COMBINATION. As much as we would like to say must and not should, it is not possible for us to expect the umpires to know which face mask is approved for use with which helmet. For example, Schutt's Pro-Guard 3000 facemask meets the standard when affixed to any Schutt helmet however Schutt's original Pro-Guard only meets the standard when affixed to the Schutt 2788, 2794, 2800 or 2898 models. And some facemasks meet the standard even when affixed to a competitor's helmet so just because a Rawlings mask is on a Mizuno helmet, it should not be eliminated from play...it might indeed be a suitable combination. So for the umpire, it's not realistic to expect them to know all the appropriate combinations HOWEVER for the coach (who also uses the rulebook..albeit sparingly for some) who provides the equipment, they need to know they "should" provide a suitable match either by purchasing the equipment already attached or by reading the instruction sheet on the unattached mask and attaching it to one of the helmet models listed as approved. Making that a "must" is, unfortunately, not enforceable and we try to keep unenforceable rules out of the book. Hope that clears up the difference a little. I am sure it will be less of an issue for umpires since they no longer routinely inspect the helmets but I hope it continues to provide the needed guidance to those purchasing the equipment.

3.10 Uniforms Question: (2001/3-11) If jersey sleeves are tied OR taped as opposed to tied AND taped, are they legal? Answer: No, as noted near the bottom of page 34, uniforms are to be worn properly. Any method of hiding the sleeve to simulate a sleeveless jersey is not permissible. Note- while this rule has little effect on the outcome of the game, its enforcement is important to the image of the game just as team jerseys replace eclectic t-shirts worn by some recreational teams

Rule 4 Game personnel

4.9 Spectators Question: (4/14/06) 1. Is using the player’s name during heckling by a fan(s) illegal? Ex.- “Come on Katie- throw another meat ball”! What about – “great job catcher/Joni, you’re the most porous backstop I’ve ever seen”… What about screaming the player’s name at the top of one’s lungs? Ex- a 10 second “Kelleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee”, whether she’s batting or playing defense? What about a Coach? Ex.- “get in the coach’s box Dave”! The Rules book has the pre-game verbiage that is read- no where does it state that names cannot be used. The comments cannot be sexist, racist, etc… 2. What about a fan using a 12” plastic megaphone or a rolled up game program with any of the above examples? They aren’t noise makers (artificial); they’re noise ‘enhancers’ according to an “administrator”. At what point does this become an umpire issue vs an administration issue?? We can’t have rabbit ears on the field, but at the same time, we can’t police every heckle in the stands either but when does heckling truly become obnoxious instead of “fun”, and whose job is it to determine this?

9

Answer: I think we are just a small part of the epidemic of poor sporting behavior by fans. Professional sports, other collegiate sports and even recreational games are seeing more and more bad behavior in the stands. But most of what you wrote is not a rule book issue but a local campus issue. What each administration is willing to tolerate (some church related schools might have a higher expectation or standard for their fans) varies considerably. And of course, we're all trying to attract more fans to our venues and add to the competitive experience so ejecting fans or curtailing their perceived "fun" will impact their potential return. So my suggestion is if the fans are a problem for the umpire or opposing team, involve the on-site administrator and allow them to judge their compliance with rule 4, section 9b (Ensure the existence of proper sporting conditions and behavior of spectators throughout competition.) If the administrator's judgement is that the behavior is appropriate but the opposing coach or umpires disagree, you have two options...if it is a conference game, concern can be expressed to the appropriate conference personnel; if it is non-conference, the team can choose to drop the school from future schedules. Those are all post event solutions but in real time, it is the on-site administrator whose judgement determines if the behavior is acceptable. As to the next issue, thundersticks, plastic megaphones and "clappers" are definitely in vogue...for all the reasons you mention...and again add to the atmosphere of the games (sometimes positive, sometimes negative). Hopefully though the on-site administrator will use their judgement in determining where to draw the line as to what is acceptable on their campus. It is challenging to allow the language and actions of the student spectators and the more conservative desires of our senior citizens or family groups who are getting involved in our sporting events....even whether the students in the front rows can stand the whole event and block the view of the patrons with seats behind them.

Rule 5 Games management

5.2 Fitness of field Question: (2001/2-12) At a predetermined half inning, usually between the top and bottom of the fifth inning, the home team wishes to have their grounds crew re-groom (water, drag, line and replace the bases) the infield. The field work is done quickly but 3-5 minutes elapses during which the home team pitcher throws warm-up pitches in foul territory before taking the field for her five warm-up pitches from the mound. Is this game delay legal? Answer: It was never the committee's intention to suspend a game to re-groom a field except in the event there is an set-up error (for example, playing at a park district and someone discovers the bases are in the 65 foot sleeves) or if conditions are dangerous (such as adding field amendment to a wet area). Of course, there is the recent addition to allow for the redrawing of lines but even that stipulates to avoid significantly delaying the game to do so. While the committee is grateful to the grounds crews which take such pride in their fields, their time on the field during the game should be limited to the repairs mentioned above and raking high traffic areas which can be done without interrupting either the normal flow of the game or between inning warm-up activities. Please note it is contrary to the spirit of the rule for the offensive team to delay coming out of the dugout in an effort to allow the grounds crew additional time on the field. In addition, if the raking of high traffic areas occurs, it should happen no more than once during a game.

10

5.6 Lineup Question: (4/21/04) We have a game that was HALTED in the 3rd inning. The question is - they have players now available for the continuation of the game that was not available on the original date because of academic reasons. Can those players be added to the lineup card as eligible subs without penalty? Answer: Unfortunately those players not on the lineup card may not be added...hence it is always best to leave everyone on the card even if they appear to be unable to play for a particular game. Question: (3/13/04) The defensive team positioned a uniformed Team Member in the stands behind the backstop to chart their own team's pitches. Also, they had a uniformed Team Member in the Press Box running the scoreboard and music between innings. Both of these uniformed players were listed on the Teams Lineup Card. Answer: All the team needs to do is have the team member remove her uniform and wear some other type of attire. The intent is to prevent the batter who hits in the next inning from sitting back there to gain information that will advantage her. 5-6b note 2 indicates that "all players listed in the starting lineup must be in uniform, in the dugout area and available to play at the start of the game." But that is not true of substitutes. The main reason for this is to allow for a player who is at class or in the training room to be listed as a substitute and able to play and yet not have a game being held up for a starter to get on site. Realizing smaller schools are personnel challenged, we don't want to disadvantage them further so if a team needs to have players pitch in behind the backstop, they need to at least have them attired properly.

Rule 6 The game

6.4 Positions of the offensive team Question: (3/7/06) Offensive team coach had 4 players outside of the dugout in dead ball territory in the spectator area swinging bats with the timing of the ball being released by the pitcher and 1 player hitting a ball attached to rubberized cords during each ∏ inning they were at bat. Umpires ruled players had to be in dugout and applied Rule 6 Section 4c, d and e. Is this a correct ruling? Answer: I am not sure what you mean by dead ball territory in the spectator area but between innings, you would be correct to apply 6-4d for activity on the field of play. If there is an area outside the field of play (bullpens or batting tunnels are the most common) and they are swinging/throwing/pitching in those areas between innings, 6-4d does not apply because it is off the field and in fact, 6-4c allows for use of the bullpen and dead ball areas while the ball is in play. Question: (4/05) After notifying a coach that his players could not run from foul into fair territory while timing a pitcher in between innings, he, the next inning, while the opposing team was replacing their pitcher, had his 2 runners on base leading off, timing the new pitchers delivery!! Curious, I looked closely at the rule after the game!! On page 57 of our rule book, it states that offensive warm-ups are "limited" to only two specific actions!! Neither of which is

11

leading off while in fair territory when a pitcher is being replaced!! Is it illegal to practice leadoffs from a base, timing a pitchers delivery, while in fair territory, when a pitcher is warming up after replacing a previous pitcher??? Answer: Yes it is illegal. Apply rule 6, section 4d while on offense and 5e while on defense. The rules are limiting to specific locations on the field so if a coach wants to do more, they can have their players off the field. Part of the reason for the limitations is to make it easy and safe for players, coaches and umpires to move around the field without fearing for their safety. Specifically, running in fair territory between innings infringes on the space for the outfielders and could clearly be a problem with overthrown balls. The second example is probably not a safety risk but leads to 'bench jockeying" when a defensive player stands at the base and prevents the offensive player from timing her pitcher. It can lead to unnecessary gamesmanship so has been illegal since the 1999 rule book.

6.11 Conferences

6.11.1 Charged defensive conferences

Question: (2/3/05) It is ok for the coach to talk to her defense while the new pitcher is warming up. 1. Coach takes one defensive conference in an inning. 2. If he/she wants to remove that pitcher later in the same inning, the coach will request a suspension of play, approach the umpire before going to the pitcher's circle and inform the umpire of the pitching change. 3. While the new pitcher is warming up, since there is a legitimate suspension in play, the coach would be allowed to talk to the defense. Rule 6-11a1 has an "Exception: On each pitching change when the pitcher has not yet pitched in the inning, one additional conference is permitted." I think this means that if, later in this same inning, the coach wants to visit the current pitcher, he/she can then use this additional conference to do so. Does the coach use up this additional conference by talking to her defense while the new pitcher is warming up? Or can she get another conference later that inning?

Answer: You are right on here. When play is suspended for the new pitcher to warm-up, both the offensive and defensive coaches are free to talk to their players. When the last warm-up pitch is thrown, the umpire needs to break up the conferences or ask if the coach wants to use a charged conference and continue whatever conversation they are in. This is also true of suspension of play for an injury...they are free to talk while medical personnel are engaged but afterward, we need to play or charge a conference and allow additional time for coaching. If the coach immediately leaves the field when the umpire is ready to play, the team still has one available timeout in that inning (due to the pitching change).

Question: (4/05) Pitcher F1 is having problems. Her coach uses a defensive conference to speak with F1. A few batters later (same inning) the coach announces to the umpire (before crossing the foul line) that S1 will replace F1 in the pitching position. S1 walks the first two batters she faces and her coach requests a defensive conference to speak with S1 (we are still in the same inning).

12

Should the umpire permit this because of Rule 6-11.a.1 (exception) or has the team already used all the defensive conferences it is allowed that inning?

Answer: The umpire should allow the conference, the first one with the substitute pitcher in the inning

Question: (4/05) After seeing her pitcher complete her warm up, the pitching coach goes out and talks to the pitcher. This is between innings and the plate umpire is cleaning the plate before the batter steps into the batter's box. The opposing coaches wanted this to be considered a charged conference. We ruled that since there was "no stoppage in play" for the conference and since it was before the pitch of the first inning there was no conference. Were we correct or should they have been charged a conference?

Answer: See rule 1, section 27 for the definition of a conference and rule 6, section 11 for application. Since the coach did not suspend play, this is not a conference...many times coaches actually stand at the mound and talk to the pitcher or defense during the warmup pitches. In this case , the coach came out to the mound but still, no suspension of play.

Question: (4/8/04) Team A on defense and team B batting, Team A catcher requested timeout to go to the mound and talk with her pitcher, which was granted. Team B coach then came down from 3rd to talk with his batter when he saw that I had given Team A a timeout. Team A assistant coach came out of Team A's dugout, came to the edge of the 3rd baseline, and asked her 3rd baseman to come over to the line. She communicated with her, and then the 3rd basemen took the information and went to the mound to discuss it with her teammates. At that point I charged Team A with a conference. Team A's head coach came out to challenge the ruling, however it is my understanding that when a player comes over and takes information from the coach to the mound that this is a conference

Answer: You are correct that because the coach delivered a message to a defensive player (and not from the dugout area) that this becomes a charged conference. Once the coach is notified that she is charged with a conference, she may go onto the field to take full advantage of her opportunity but either way, that's the conference for the inning.

Rule 8 Players and substitutes

8.1 Players on team Question: (4/26/04) Halted game continuation. The team is using DP/Flex and has used up all available substitutes. The left fielder becomes incapacitated. The DP goes in to play left field. It becomes left fields turn to bat. Is it an out or a forfeit? If forfeit, do we need to get to her turn at bat before declaring or could it happen at pre-game? Answer: On the lineup card, enter the DP to play left field. She continues to bat in the same position of the batting order so there is no substitution, the original left fielder is still in the batting order but is otherwise in the dugout. When the left fielder's position in the batting order

13

comes up, she should enter the batter's box, assuming she is physically capable of doing so. She can stand in the box and take pitches without the intent to get on base, but if her spot in the order is unfilled, the team will have to forfeit as there is no provision for playing short-handed. The forfeit does not actually occur until the position in the batting order comes up because there is always the possibility the game would be stopped for some other reason before that spot comes up, perhaps the mercy rule invoked, inclement weather, an action of the opponent that halts the game, etc.

8.3 Improper player

8.3.2 Inaccurate lineup card Question: (2/26/06) Is it an inaccurate lineup card if a player, Jane Doe wearing number 7, is listed as Jane Doe, number 7 in the written batting order but is listed as Jane Doe, number 18 in the pre-printed roster on the bottom of the card? Answer: there is an opportunity to use preventative umpiring by asking the coaches to review their line-up cards before they become official. Hopefully they would catch their own error and confusion can be avoided. However if it does go undetected, the written lineup would take precedence and in this situation, a correction to the card would be made but no other action. HOWEVER if it were reversed (Jane Doe is wearing number 7, is listed on the written lineup as number 18 but on the printed lineup as 7), that becomes an inaccurate lineup. Question: (2/26/06) And can the incorrect number at the bottom of the card be changed by merely crossing out the incorrect number and putting in the present number beside her name in the pre-printed portion? Before or after the lineup is made official? Answer: Yes, many time teams with multiple uniforms have someone with two numbers depending on the uniform jersey so coaches can cross out the incorrect number and replace it with the correct one. This should be done prior to the start of the game but sometimes is caught during the contest. The number should be corrected to match the written lineup. Question: (2/21/06) The coach informed the home plate umpire that he was going to protest the spelling of one of the girl's last names on the line-up if they were forced to go into a tiebreaker. In game 2 he did protest the spelling of a girl's first name. In the first instance the player's name was written incorrectly on the line-up, but was correctly printed on the bottom of the line-up. The question the umpires had was since it was brought to our attention by the coach before he invoked the rule should we inform the opposing coach that this was brought to our attention and would she like to correct it (preventive umpiring)? Second, since the name on the bottom of the line-up was correct and there was only one person with this last name (first name misspelled) is it still an inaccurate line-up? Answer: First, the possible misspelling of a player’s name…this is a judgment call and will depend on the confusion the misspelling brings. If there are two players on the team named Smith and Smythe and the name on the card is written Smyth, there’s a better case for a penalty than if Tschida is misspelled Tchida. Similarly, if someone’s first name is misspelled but the last name is correct and unique to just one player, there is little chance of confusion (for example,

14

Stephanie is misspelled as Stefany but her last name is Smith and there are no other Smiths on the team). The benefit of the doubt should go to not penalizing the team if no confusion results or if the writing is difficult to read but the printing at the bottom for the card is clear. Second, when the umpires accept the line-up cards, they review them and can ask for corrections if they notice a misspelling or something more serious (like a DP but no FLEX listed or two players listed with their position as the pitcher). The opportunity to correct any of those mistakes in the pre-game meeting just eliminates confusion later and is good preventative umpiring.

8.3.3 Unreported players Question: (3/10/06) A was playing B. In the Fourth inning the A coach calls time and announces a substitute of 6 for 24. I repeated 6 for 24 and recorded it on my lineup card. I announced 6 for 24 to the B coach. After the next pitch the B coach called time and came out and said to me, "You announced 6 for 24 to us, but that is number 12 on the base." I looked at the runner and indeed it was number 12. I walked over to the A coach and told him about the mistake he had made. I told him that he could either keep 12 in the game or re-enter 24, but that either way it was an out. He opted to re-enter 24. At the end of the inning I told the B coach that because 12 had incorrectly entered the game that she was no longer viable as a substitute, but that 6 was. Answer: When you record the substitution reported to you that renders 24 out of the game (and if a starter, still has her re-entry) and enters 6 from the bench (her allowable entry into the game). Now you have an unreported substitution (number 12 for number 6) so 6 is out of the game permanently and you apply rule 8, section 3c4 which is no pitch, the unreported player is out and declared officially in the game. If the coach reenters 24 then 12 is out of the game permanently, 24 has used her one re-entry, and there is no base-runner now due to the out. You are incorrect to tell the coach that 6 is a viable substitute because 6 was in and then out immediately when 12 entered for her so she indeed was not available based on rule 8, section 5a3.

Rule 9 Defense

9.2 No catch Question: (3/13/04) If a fielder trying to catch a ball has the ball in her glove subsequently knocks down the fence and loses possession of the ball and it lands on the fence while the fence is lying down. Answer: It is not a catch since the fielder did not control and voluntarily release the ball (the ground caused the ball to be dropped). The ball was over the fence in fair territory and so it is a homerun. This is the same as a fielder 'tipping' a fair ball over the fence in fair territory. In specific circumstances the umpire could judge that the fielder had control of the ball long enough to establish a catch. I have seen a fielder make the catch, take a step or two and fall over a short fence thus dropping the ball as she attempts to "catch herself" and protect her face. While the release was not voluntary, the catch clearly occurred before going out of play. In this situation the catch would be good, the batter would be out, the ball would be dead, and all runners would be advanced one base from the time of the pitch.

15

9.4 Types of obstruction

9.4.2 Fielder obstruction

Question: (3/25/08) Runner on first. The batter hits a long fly ball to deep left field close to the foul pole. The runner advances watching for the catch. The second baseman also moves to second base watching for the catch. The runner attempts to round second, but the second baseman obstructs her. I signal delayed dead ball and say "obstruction". Then the left fielder misses the ball and it falls foul in the corner. Since it was a foul ball, do we still issue a warning to the second baseman for a rounding obstruction? Answer: At the time of the obstruction, you have a delayed dead ball and obstruction call as you did. Then once the ball is dead, you issue the warning to the second baseman and notify the coach unless that player had previously been warned and then you have the one base award as detailed in 9.4.2.3 even though the ball ended up being an uncaught foul ball. Question: (2/26/03) Runners on 1st and 2nd. The batter hits a dribbler up the middle (so both the shortstop and 2nd baseman break toward 2nd base to make a play) that the pitcher just happens to snare. The pitcher then throws to 3rd for an apparent force out. However, either the 1st or 3rd base umpire has signaled obstruction on the shortstop who bumped the runner from 2nd as she was heading to the middle to make a play on the ball (which of course was caught by the pitcher). What do you have? The book says that a runner is protected between the bases she is obstructed and cannot be called out, but the shortstop was also carrying out her duty to go toward the direction of the batted ball. There is no way the runner from 2nd would have made it to 3rd if the ‘obstruction’ had not happened… Answer: Since the pitcher fielded the ball, only she is entitled to protection so there is no interference by the runner on the play. If in the umpire's judgment it was the shortstop who was the first fielder to have a chance to make the play and the pitcher made a miraculous catch, then the contact would not be obstruction. Per rule 9, section 18c1, "A fielder who is not in possession of the ball, not in the act of fielding a batted ball, or not about to receive a thrown ball, shall not impede the batter, batter-runner or runner." This too, relates to judgment. If the pitcher was the protected player, the shortstop is guilty of obstruction and the runner should be awarded the base(s) she would have earned had obstruction not occurred. There is also the possibility of a no call for inadvertent contact. If the ball was clearly the pitcher's to field, the shortstop obstructed the runner. However if the ball was clearly the shortstop's to field (but the pitcher miraculously snagged it), do not penalize the runner by invoking interference on a player who never had a chance to make the play. The rule book does cite the obstructed runner cannot be put out between bases (9-17c and 12-5d note 2) and this appears to be problematic for your situation where I think you are inferring that the runner really had no chance of being safe at third. The overriding principle for placing obstructed runners has always been the base they would have reached had there not been obstruction...hence the apparent contradiction. Application of the rules requires me to say, award the runner third on the obstruction.

16

9.4.2.3 Rounding and returning

Question: (4/27/07) If the 1st offense/warning on a defensive player is issued for "intentionally prohibiting seeing the release of the pitch" and then the same individual commits the "Rounding/Returning" obstruction . . .is the penalty of a next base award given? or are each of these occurrences treated separately? Answer: They are treated separately so she would get a warning for her positioning and then one for rounding/returning. Question: (3/05) 1B has been warned. Runner rounds first and is obstructed by 1B. Umpire judges R could have made second. R goes on to third and is put out by mile. By the obstruction rule, she is out. But by 'round/return' rule, she should be awarded a base. Answer: The out would stand. The runner is awarded one base beyond the rounding or returning obstruction, and if the runner gets more than that on their own, there would be no additional award. If the runner is legally put out beyond what would have been the one base award, she is out. Question: (3/05) We had obstruction on the third baseperson on a runner returning to third base. Obstruction was signaled and called, but the formal warning was not given right away (as we should do with obstruction with rounding and returning). The umpire between the half inning after the incident did go to the coach and player and inform them of the warning for obstruction of this type. Our question is there a time that we cannot go back and warn after we have forgotten to warn (i.e. next pitch, end of half inning, or before next occurrence). One problem I see is that a coach will say "yes you did call obstruction, but you did not give us a warning". On the other hand, the opposing coach may say the next time obstruction happens with this player that her team should get the next base because of the last occurrence was for obstruction while rounding or returning. Answer: In the unfortunate circumstance that the warning is not given immediately, it should be given as soon as possible because subsequent obstruction calls will result in a base award and we want to proactively prevent that whenever possible. Ideally, the player and coach know and will adjust their positioning but the umpire's warning is the safety net before the base award applies and we'd like that whenever possible.

9.4.2.4 Fielder in runner’s line of vision Question: Has there been any discussion on removing the "intentionally" on the prohibiting seeing the release of the pitch. The 1B players are getting pretty good at being in the way without ever looking over their shoulder, hence being non-intentional, but this is still prohibiting the runner from seeing the release. Answer: Either the runner should ask the defensive player to move or the umpire can (if she notices the runner having difficulty positioning herself on the base and able to see). As soon as she is alerted, she should comply nad if it continues, then you have grounds for assuming this is

17

intentional. The reason we chose to leave "intentional" in is that the runner can "draw the violation" by positioning herself behind the fielder and then innocently claim not to see.

Rule 10 Pitching

10.2 Taking signal from catcher Question: (2/26/03) The pitcher puts her front foot on the rubber and looks in to the catcher who by her hand/arm movements gives the pitcher the signal. The pitcher then steps on the rubber with her other foot and begins her windup. Is this a legal pitch or an illegal pitch? 10-2.b says she must have both feet on the rubber to take a signal or simulate taking the signal from the catcher. The other side of the coin says that she is still simulating taking the signal before her hands come together since she is looking toward the plate (although the catcher is not making any hand/arm movements indicating she is now giving a signal) after both feet are on the rubber. Answer: The pitcher is not restricted to taking only 1 signal. She can stand as you describe and receive a signal from the catcher or the coach in the dugout or her dad in the stands. But she must then take another signal or simulate taking a signal in the position described in 2a...both feet on the pitcher's plate, shoulders in line with first and third bases, hands separated, the ball in either (but not both hands). This second position alerts the batter and umpire that she is about to bring her hands together, separate them and deliver the pitch.

10.13 Foreign substance Question: 3/15/07) Concerning Mighty Grip and Gorilla Grip. I assume either of these grip enhancers requires a wipe-off prior to contact with the ball. However, I also can see that if these gripping agents are not considered a foreign substance, they would not require that wipe-off, as that only pertains to a foreign substance. So, is a wipe required, or not. If the pitcher is using "Mighty Grip" and nothing is sticking to the ball, do we require them to wipe their hand? Answer: Mighty grip can be used to dry the pitcher's hand and because nothing transfers to the ball, she does not have to wipe it off. However it cannot be applied directly to the ball and if it is, it will be an illegal pitch. If a similar substance is used and residue does transfer to the ball, that too would have to be wiped off or result in an illegal pitch. So if there's a product you are not familiar with, ask the pitcher to apply it as she wants to use it in a game, then have her grip the ball and hand it to you. If there is transfer of product onto the ball, then you have a foreign substance that is not appropriate. If not, then the product would be okay.

10.18 Time allowed between pitches Question: (2/21/06) At the start of the game the home team has finished their warm-up and are huddling at the mound, the pitcher has the ball and the batter is at the box ready to hit. Should the umpire call "Play Ball" and start the 10 second count or should he wait until the huddle breaks. Answer: Manage the flow of the game by allowing the huddle to break up but if this is taking an excessive amount of time, you can walk toward the mound and encourage the players to assume their positions. If your reminders continue without a change in their behavior, it MIGHT be

18

necessary to say "play ball" and begin the count but I suspect that will be the exception. Most players will adapt their timing and finish their huddle and be ready to disperse and play in reasonable time. Question: (2/20/06) The question has come up about the beginning of an inning. Does the time between pitches apply to the beginning of each half inning? The pitcher has the ball (after warm ups) and now the team all huddles, the batter is near the batters box and the umpire is ready are we applying this rule or just enforcing it between pitches was the inning has started? Answer: It was really meant for between pitches within an inning or by the same pitcher but it is not in conflict if you start the inning by saying "play " or "play ball" and then the ten seconds begins. And it would be a useful tool if one team is ready to go and the other is dawdling around! Question: (12/29/07) After a pitch to the batter the catcher returns the ball to the pitcher. The batter gets her sign from her coach and gets both feet in the batter's box in approximately six seconds. If the pitcher is not standing on the pitcher's plate within the next four seconds should the umpire shall declare "Dead Ball" and award a ball on the batter Answer: Yes. The reference is 10.18 but it seems we are missing the first paragraph of the effect. It detailed a strike is awarded if the batter fails to comply with getting into position in the initial 10 seconds and a ball is awarded if the pitcher fails to comply with getting into position in the initial 10 seconds or to bring her hands together in the subsequent 10 seconds. Question: (2/21/06) The batter is in the box and pitcher on the mound before the first 10 second count expires and the second 10 second count has begun, after 3-4 seconds the pitcher backs off the mound. It does not appear that she is having trouble with the sign. She has not shaken off any signs. Should we call time? Should we award a ball? Answer: Before the count begins, there is plenty of time for giving the players latitude but if the ten seconds expires and the pitcher just walks off the back of the mound for no apparent reason, this is the behavior we are trying to change by awarding a ball to the batter. IF she has a legitimate issue (loses her grip on the ball, has trouble with the signs, doesn't like the pitch called), that's an appropriate time for you to call time and allow everyone to reset themselves without penalizing her by awarding a ball. Question: (2/21/06) The batter and pitcher are in position and the 10 second count has begun, (a) the batter steps out of the box causing the pitcher to step off the mound before the 10 seconds are up; (b) the batter steps out before the 10 seconds are up and the pitcher stays on the mound; (c) the pitcher steps off causing the batter to step out. Answer: (a)strike but the key here is the batter caused it...not both happening simultaneously; (b)strike; (c) ball but the key here is the pitcher caused it...not both happening simultaneously.

19

10.19 Warm-up pitches allowed Question: (1/17/07) Play: a pitcher is removed from the game or pitching position due to injury. Her replacement takes more than 5 warm-up pitches to get ready. Can the original pitcher come back to pitch in this game? Answer: NCAA rules do not prevent the pitcher from returning to pitch...they only prevent a pitcher who returns in the same inning from having any warm-up pitches. So if a pitcher is removed due to injury, the substitute enters and is allowed adequate warm-up time. Then the original pitcher is ready to return, she can do so...even in the same inning... with no limitations other than not receiving warm-up pitches in the same inning. You are absolutely correct that this could be used inappropriately however in all cases, we error on the side of student-athlete welfare and safety. We hope it is never abused BUT if it is, we also hope that word will get around about a particular coach using this and then it can be addressed through their administration. Could someone get away with it once, absolutely; but if they use it several times, the coaching community will be buzzing about it and we think asking a student-athlete to fake an injury to get that extra warm-up time will be a tough secret to keep.

Rule 11 Batting

11.2 Legal position in batter’s box Question: (2001/11-2) May a batter take a stride position at the front of the batter’s box and, as the pitch is delivered, move the rear foot backward toward the catcher (to reclaim the batter’s box from a catcher who has legally moved forward) and therefore be compensated for catcher obstruction if contact occurs? Answer: No, since the only possible reason for moving backward is to hinder the catcher, this action is inconsistent with the spirit of the game and should not result in rewarding the offender. Note- the catcher may not obstruct, hinder or prevent the batter’s legitimate attempt to make contact with a pitch so movement by the batter that enhances her ability to contact the pitch is protected by catcher obstruction’s penalty. The benefit of the doubt must go to the batter. Abandoning her batting position Question: (2001/12-10) If a batter believes she has been struck out and leaves the playing area (i.e. enters the dugout), do the same penalties apply as if she was a base runner who abandons her base or a batter-runner who fails to advance on a base award? Answer: No, the batter may be summoned from off the field of play and return to complete her turn at bat without penalty.

11.8 Bat

11.8.5 Thrown bat

Question: (2/6/08) I understand that we are issuing a team warning after the 1st offense. Does that only apply to the offending team (allowing the other team a free throw in a heated game)? Or is this the same as throwing at a batter and warnings are issued to both participating teams?

20

Answer: The rules committee intended for the warning to be given to the offended team...there has been some confusion of whether it is a team warning or player warning but I had not heard that folks were thinking both teams are warned. Thanks for letting me know so I can help clear that up.

11.11 Batting out of order Question: (12/14/07) What do we do with an out generated on a play with one out and the play (batting out of order) is properly appealed? We list the things that are nullified, but don't mention outs. Assume we nullify them, but we should mention them as well. Answer: The NCAA committee has been very strong on the point that you get the out if you want it and not the effect for batting out of order OR you can take the effect for batting out of order and give up the out...your choice but you cannot have it both ways. The other groups have slowly decided to give the offended team all the benefits but I don't hear any support for that... yet.

11.14 Dropped third strike then interference Question: (2001/11-14) With less than 2 out and first base occupied, the batter runner advances toward first base and draws a throw after a third strike not held by the catcher. The throw ricochets off the batter-runner (who was out on strikes) allowing the runner to advance to second base. Answer: Rule 11, section 14 covers the general rule for dropped third strike. The ball is live and runners may advance. However since the batter-runner is already out on strikes, when she interferes with a defensive player’s opportunity to make a play, apply the penalty in rule 9, section 13e. That is, the ball is dead and the runner closest to home at the time of the interference shall be declared out. If there had been additional runners, they would be returned to the last base touched at the time of interference.

11.18 Infield fly rule Question: (1/28/03) Is the infield fly rule in effect even if no umpire calls it? Answer: On page 19, under the definition of infield fly which is section 66, the definition starts off "when declared by the umpire..." and on page 131, section 18 it says the rule is in effect when "declared by the umpire..." If a ball is hit that would otherwise meet the definition but is NOT declared, it is NOT an infield fly.

11.22 Interference by batter Question (2001/9-8) If a batter swings at a pitch so late that the ball is in the catcher’s glove, is the call interference on the batter, catcher obstruction or no call? Answer: This is a judgment call with an overriding principle of penalizing the offender. If the catcher anticipates the pitch and reaches forward to catch the ball over the plate, it is catcher obstruction. If the catcher catches the pitch well behind the plate and the purpose of the swing is to impede the catcher, that is batter interference. In the unlikely event both players are acting appropriately, it is generally a no call.

21

Rule 12 Base Running

12.2 Interference by batter-runner

12.2.2 With an infield fly

Question: (2001/9-9) With the bases loaded and one out, the batter hits a high infield fly ball toward first base. The umpire invokes the infield fly rule however no infielder attempts to catch the ball. The ball lands in fair territory where the batter-runner contacts it. The first baseman subsequently fields the rebounded ball and tags the runner standing a step off first base. What rule applies? Answer: As soon as the ball and runner collide, the ball is declared dead. Since the contact occurred in fair territory, the batter is out by application of the infield fly rule and runners are returned to the bases occupied at the time of the pitch. Had the contact occurred in foul territory, the correct call would have been foul ball. Even though the batter-runner had been declared out on the infield fly and subsequent contact occurred, it is not batter-runner interference because no fielder was attempting to make a play at the time of the contact.

12.2.4.2 Running lane interference Question (1/3/05) B1 is a slap hitter. She makes contact and the ball bounces high in the air and then rolls along the first base line in fair ground. As she runs toward 1B, her left foot is outside the runner’s lane. The catcher fields the ball and throws toward 1B to retire B1. The throw hits her in the left shoulder and caroms into right field. The plate umpire declares a dead ball and rules B1 out. Rule 9-9-2 d refers to the foot must be "on the ground" to be declared out. So if the batter-runners left foot is in the air but outside the running lane, we cannot declare her out? Answer: Yes 9-9-d (page 96) requires contact with the ground in order for the player to be considered out of a restricted area. The same would hold true of a batter whose foot was vertically above and over a line in the batter's box or a body part extending over an out of play area yet not in contact with it.

On a base on balls Question: (2001/12-23) Runner on third. Batter receives a base on balls and trots down to first base. After she is half way and the running lane has started, the catcher throws to first in an attempt to keep her from continuing to second. 1) The throw hits the batter-runner who is in fair territory or 2) the throw hits a part of the runner’s body which is over fair territory although her feet are both in the running lane. Answer: On the base award, the batter-runner cannot be put out solely as a result of a defender’s action. However she can be put out for violating base running rules (see definition of without liability to be put out rule 1, section 117).In the first situation, the batter-runner has violated rule 12, section 23b which stipulates she shall not run outside the runner’s lane and interfere with the fielder taking the throw at first base. On the interference, the ball is dead, the batter-runner is out and each other runner returns to her base. In the second situation, there is no interference since the batter-runner’s feet are within the runner’s lane. The ball is live and runners may advance at

22

their own risk. Note that in the second example, if the batter-runner, even though she is in the runner’s lane, intentionally interferes by waving her hands, interference would be enforced.

12.19 Interference by runner

12.19.1.4.2 Running in front of fielder Question: (2/7/08) In NCAA Softball, does there have to be contact between a runner and a fielder to have interference? Play: Runner on 2B, ball hit to shortstop and the runner advancing to 3B jumps over the ball. Does the act of jumping over the ball have to be judged by the umpire as to whether the runner interfered with the fielders opportunity to field a ball or does there have to be contact with the ball or fielder in order to have interference? Answer: The rulebook specifically addresses a play similar to yours on page 187. Simply jumping over the ball, even though it confuses or momentarily blocks the vision of the SS, is generally not interference unless the runner pauses, yells, waves her arms. In other words, if the fielder is naturally proceeding to the next base and does nothing “designed to interfere” (umpire’s judgment) then it would not be interference. In the end, if there is no contact, it does come down to judgment as to if the runners actions actually interfered with the fielder's opportunity to play the ball. And there can be some pretty good actresses on both sides of the play so don't be shy about your own great performance in selling the call.

Question: (4/6/04) Does physical contact have to be made by a runner on a defensive player fielding a ball before interference can be called? I believe that when the NCAA rule book first came out that was the rule but not now. Answer: Physical contact does not have to be made. Perhaps you are thinking of the change from the 2000 book to the 2001 book in rule 9, section 13a4. The 1997 through 2000 books had "Any physical contact by the base runner with a fielder attempting to field a batted ball, whether intentional or unintentional, shall be interference, provided the fielder had a reasonable chance to make a play." In 2001 the word "Any" was removed. That's the only change and really doesn't change the concept.

12.19.1.4.4 Protecting only fielder making the play Question: (2/26/03) Runners on 1st and 2nd. The batter hits a dribbler up the middle (so both the shortstop and 2nd baseman break toward 2nd base to make a play) that the pitcher just happens to snare. The pitcher then throws to 3rd for an apparent force out. However, either the 1st or 3rd base umpire has signaled obstruction on the shortstop who bumped the runner from 2nd as she was heading to the middle to make a play on the ball (which of course was caught by the pitcher). What do you have? The book says that a runner is protected between the bases she is obstructed and cannot be called out, but the shortstop was also carrying out her duty to go toward the direction of the batted ball. There is no way the runner from 2nd would have made it to 3rd if the ‘obstruction’ had not happened.

23

Answer: Under interference in rule 9, section 13a4d, "If two fielders try to field a batted ball and the runner contacts one or both, the umpire shall decide which one is entitled to field the ball, ant that fielder only is entitled to protection." Since the pitcher fielded the ball, only she is entitled to protection so there is no interference by the runner on the play. However it should be noted that had the pitcher missed the ball, it would be umpire's judgment as to if she had a reasonable chance to field the ball (and missed it) or if the first fielder with a chance to field it would be shortstop or second baseman. If in the umpire's judgment it was the shortstop who was the first fielder to have a chance to make the play and the pitcher made a miraculous catch, then the contact would not be obstruction. Per rule 9, section 18c1, "A fielder who is not in possession of the ball, not in the act of fielding a batted ball, or not about to receive a thrown ball, shall not impede the batter, batter-runner or runner." This too, relates to judgment. If the pitcher was the protected player, the shortstop is guilty of obstruction and the runner should be awarded the base(s) she would have earned had obstruction not occurred. There is also the possibility of a no call for inadvertent contact. If the ball was clearly the pitcher's to field, the shortstop obstructed the runner. However if the ball was clearly the shortstop's to field (but the pitcher miraculously snagged it), do not penalize the runner by invoking interference on a player who never had a chance to make the play. The rule book does cite the obstructed runner cannot be put out between bases (9-17c and 12-5d note 2) and this appears to be problematic for your situation where I think you are inferring that the runner really had no chance of being safe at third. The overriding principle for placing obstructed runners has always been the base they would have reached had there not been obstruction...hence the apparent contradiction. Application of the rules requires me to say, award the runner third on the obstruction.

12.21 Look-back rule Question: (5/11/06) Runner on 3rd base. Batter receives a base on balls. Ball immediately goes back to the pitcher in the circle. Batter runner crosses 1st base and continues down the right field line, makes an arc deep into right field and continues her arc towards 2nd base (envision the McDonald's arch). A bit confused, the pitcher cocks her arm in a obvious attempt at a play on the batter-runner at which time, the runner on 3rd base releases off the base. Now the pitcher brings her arm back down to her side so that she is no longer making a play. Is the look back rule back in effect now and does the runner on 3rd now have to immediately make a decision to return to 3rd or advance to home? Does the batter runner have to continue to 2nd if she is still headed in that direction after the pitcher is no longer making a play and she has taken several steps in that direction or is she allowed one stop even though the pitcher is no longer making a play on her. Answer: Once the pitcher makes a play, both runners are released from the restrictions of the look back rule so both can leave their base and advance or leave their base, stop to locate the ball and choose their direction. It is not a time related play (ie the runner is free only during the time the pitcher is making a play); it is an all or nothing (ie the pitcher makes a play, the runners are released...pitcher makes no play, the runners are restricted). The fact that the pitcher started to make a play and changed her mind (and stopped) does not shorten the amount of time the runners have to advance or return.

24

Rule 15 Umpires

15.2 Duties Question: (4/16/04) During the last week, umpires have described plays being used by teams designed solely to deceive their opponent and gain advantage. I think most of umpires have heard of these 'trick' plays or have seen them on baseball, not softball. Offense Example: Runner on first base. Batter with 2 ball count. Next pitch is called a ball. Batter drops bats and proceeds to first base. Runner on first advances to second. Umpires returned batter to plate and leave runner at second base. Later in the game, coach told plate umpire 'that play works every time." This puts the defense in awkward position of attempting to retire the runner advancing to second base that may not be liable to be put out, if pitch is ball 4. Defense Example: Runner on third base. Following a pitch, the catcher bounces out to simulate a pick off, stumbles and falls without releasing the ball. Third base, shortstop, and left fielder all act like they are chasing an overthrow. Runner attempts to advance and is tagged out by the catcher. Do you feel these plays are part of NCAA softball or consider them a form of interference/obstruction? Answer: I have seen both these plays...matter of fact a coach in your area is an annual user...so we have talked about this before. There are lots of elements of the game designed to deceive the opponent and gain an advantage....throwing pitches other than straight fastballs is designed to deceive the opponent as is taking a batting stance and then changing to bunt at the last second and many other traditional parts of the game. So disallowing these on the basis that they deceive the opponent is not appropriate. Now are they unsporting? You might have more of an argument here but even then there are examples of situations that might be planned and others that might actually be mistakes and differentiating might be an issue. Clearly a practiced and executed play such as the second example is easily identifiable but a batter walking on ball three and a runner advancing ahead of her may or may not be intentional. So the short of it is that the onus is on the players (both offensive and defensive) and coaches to know what is going on in the game and react appropriately.

15.9 Umpires judgment

15.9.3 Rectifying a situation

Question: (4/27/06) The plate umpire made a mistake when a coach made changes that involved a DP change and substitute entering the game at the same time. The opposing coach an inning later, wanted 24 DQ’d; or ejected or something; anyhow, the home plate umpire stood his ground and said the opposing coach had reported correctly and he in fact had made the mistake. She protested the game on an illegal re-entry. Answer: As long as #21 was a legal substitute and the mistake was by the umpire, you are right that it is correctable. Since the opposing coach protested on the grounds of an illegal reentry and no one reentered, it would be denied even if he/she went through the process.

25

Question: (4/10/06) A batted ball bounced over the fence. The first base umpire had gone out and correctly signaled for dead ball when the ball left the field. The batter-runner was incorrectly awarded third base. The offensive team substituted for the runner at third. Then the base award error was corrected and the batter-runner was put back at second base on the ground rule double. Now the offensive coach did not want the substitution. Because the batter runner was initially put on the incorrect base, then later corrected I did not feel that a player's entry into the game should be put in jeopardy and did not keep the sub recorded. At this point the visiting coach protested the game. I am familiar with the substitution rule and realize I did not apply it correctly. At the time I felt it was common sense to not put a player in jeopardy as a result of a correctable error on the part of the umpires. Answer: I do believe you did the right thing. The substitution was based on the coach thinking the substitute was going to be on third, not second. AND that belief was based on information from the umpire (awarding her third on a ground rule double) so that is correctable. We had a similar circumstance with a batter who was awarded first on a base on balls. The offensive coach made an immediate substitution for the now runner at first with the plate umpire. At the same time, the defensive coach came out of the dugout and talked to the first base umpire, asking for a checked swing on the last pitch. The base umpire discussed with the coach the proper appeal process would be to the plate so coach waited until the plate umpire was free and asked for an appeal. The plate umpire asked for the appeal and the first base umpire called it a swing. Now the count is 3-1. In this case, the umpires allowed the coach to rescind her substitution of the "pinch runner" and allow the original batter to return to the batter's box to complete her turn at bat.