Master Batters vs. Terminal Digits

I took a bunch of pictures at yesterday's game which you can find here.

There was some discussion in the stands about three controversial rulings in yesterday's game. I witnessed two of them and one of them was definitely a blown call by the umpire. I didn't have a clear view of the second one but my impression was that the umpire made the correct call. The third one I did not witness because I was beyond the centerfield fence taking some pictures. I'll get to that one last.


The call that was clearly blown by the umpire was a tag play at home plate. The TD's runner was heading for home and the throw to the plate was off line. The MB's pitcher caught the errant throw and turned in time to tag the runner before the runner reached the home plate veer line. The umpire ruled the runner out.

This is the City of Richmond's playing rule #8.B:

"A home plate veer line will be used. Runners MAY NOT touch home plate or the mat; instead they must cross the veer line. All plays at home plate will be by force; no sliding, no tag plays are allowed. A player will be determined safe if the player’s foot or other body part touches the veer line."

Since the fielder did not touch home plate with the ball in his possession before the runner crossed the veer line, the umpire should have ruled the runner safe at home. The tag was irrelevant.

Next, we have the collision between the MB's first baseman and the TD's batter/runner at first base in the seventh inning. Rule 8.2.M covers the double base. For brevity, I'll skip over the parts that don't address the runner-fielder relationship.

"The double base shall be used at first base in all divisions of play. The following rules should be enforced:
3. When a play is being made on the batter-runner, the defense must use the white portion of the base and the batter-runner the colored portion of the base. EFFECT: The batter-runner is out when there is a play being made at first base and the batter runner touches only the white portion, providing the defense appeals prior to the batter runner returning to first base. Once the batter runner returns to first base, an appeal shall not be honored.
4. On any force out attempt from the foul side of first base the defense and the batter-runner may use either the white or colored portion.
5. On an errant throw pulling the defense off the white portion of the base into foul ground, the defense and the batter-runner can use either the white or colored portion.
9. On plays at first base when the batter-runner touches only the white portion and collides with the fielder about to catch a thrown ball while on the white portion of the base. EFFECT M-9: Interference, the ball is dead, the batter-runner is out, and runners must return to the last base occupied at the time of the interference.

I didn't have a clear view of this play so I'm going by the way it looked from my vantage point. As I saw it, the TD's batter-runner hit a grounder on the infield and sprinted hard to first base to beat the throw. He ran to first base legally and touched the orange portion of the bag. In making the catch, the MB's first baseman moved into the batter-runner's path. It's unfortunate that the collision occurred but as the ball and the runner arrived at nearly the same time and the fielder moved into the runner's path, the contact was unavoidable. There was no violation and the umpire made the correct call.

If the batter-runner ran inside the foul line, touched the white portion of the bag and collided with the first baseman attempting to field the throw, the batter-runner was guilty of interference and he should have been called out as described in 8.2.M.9. Again, from where I was standing, I did not see batter-runner interference. If someone with a better view than mine saw it differently, please chime in. The umpire was looking straight down the first base line so he had the best view in the house. I assume he saw it the same way I did.

Finally, the issue that came up while I was out taking pictures was the enforcement of rule 4.1.C.3.e-f:

"A team shall consist of players in the following positions:
3. Slow Pitch
e. Co-ed 10 players; five male and five females, pitcher (FI), catcher (F2), first baseman (F3), second baseman (F4), third baseman (F5), shortstop (F6), left fielder (F7), left center fielder (F8), right center fielder (F9) and right fielder (F10). They must have have two males and two females in both the infield and outfield and one male and one female at pitcher and catcher.
f.Co-ed with Extra Player (EP). Tweleve players; six male and six female as in ten players with two extra hitters who bat."

We had an exemption to this in 2008 which was local co-ed rule E:

"E. There will be no restrictions on a player (man or woman) as to which defensive position he or she may play."

This was eliminated from the local rules for 2009. Now we have local rule 2.A that requires only that four players be positioned beyond the outfield markers, essentially eliminating the rover/buck short position. 2.A.1 requires that two women play in the outfield but it's redundant because that's already in the national ASA rules. Here's the local rule.

2. Fielding:
A) Outfielders (including rovers / buck shorts) must remain behind the restraint line and infielders must remain in the infield until the pitch reaches the plate or is hit (The restraint line is a line of cones in the outfield at an arch 150’ from home plate). PENALTY: Failure to abide by this rule will result in fielder’s interference. A delayed dead ball will be called by the official. If the batter reaches the base safely, the play will stand. If an out was made, the batter will be placed on base safely.
1.) Must have at least two women in the outfield.

So the MB's were correct to insist that the TD's employ a male catcher since they were employing a female pitcher. Nothing in the local rule supersedes the national ASA rule. Therefore, the umpire enforced the rule correctly.