Legit Q: Softball Rule Dilemma

[R1Letterman]

The penalty for an illegal pitch is a ball on batter and runners advance one base UNLESS all runners including batter advance one base (as it is a delayed dead ball in ncaa and action continues)

now suppose there is just a runner on second, and a pitcher beans the batter but does so with an illegal pitch.

the illegal pitch would not be cancelled as R2 does not advance with the batters free base since not forced. so if enforced as an illegal pitch r2 would advance with batter remaining at bat with 1-0 count.

theoretically could a batter be beaned twice in this scenario? now with runner on third and coming in on enforced illegal pitch. i do realize there is a provision for a coaches option in some situations where the first two caveats do not occur.

[R1Letterman]

or once on r3, they could be beaned again without an illegal pitch just resulting in first and third

[R1Letterman]

or remain at bat, run scores and then get beaned a third time (with legal pitch resulting in base on ball or illegal pitch resulting in cancellation of illegal pitch and acceptance of advance)

[fanof71]

Or....What do you think this board is...a replecation of a Dear Abby column. Geeze, send it to the commissioners office.

[R1Letterman]

Or....What do you think this board is...a replecation of a Dear Abby column. Geeze, send it to the commissioners office.

checks notes: - doesnt address post or thread
- generic post that could almost be posted anywhere

very botlike, meanwhile post was clearly labeled ot, also posted on just ragin, not, rage page, yet his google alert still worked and he got his clique master to move it, hmm

maybe it was a cash grab, im sure your post led to more rcaf members as we speak

[IndiaPaleAle]

The penalty for an illegal pitch is a ball on batter and runners advance one base UNLESS all runners including batter advance one base (as it is a delayed dead ball in ncaa and action continues)

now suppose there is just a runner on second, and a pitcher beans the batter but does so with an illegal pitch.

the illegal pitch would not be cancelled as R2 does not advance with the batters free base since not forced. so if enforced as an illegal pitch r2 would advance with batter remaining at bat with 1-0 count.

theoretically could a batter be beaned twice in this scenario? now with runner on third and coming in on enforced illegal pitch. i do realize there is a provision for a coaches option in some situations where the first two caveats do not occur.

The NCAA changed the rule two or three years ago: illegal pitches no longer carry the penalty of advancing the runner to the next base. It is only a ball on the batter.

In the situation you presented, by rule, the ball would be dead, the batter would be awarded first base via hit by pitch, and the runner at second would not advance because she is not forced. By rule, the coach does not have the option in this situation.

For those of you interested in searching it, it’s Rule 10.8 Effect 3 in the NCAA Softball Rule Book.

[R1Letterman]

The NCAA changed the rule two or three years ago: illegal pitches no longer carry the penalty of advancing the runner to the next base. It is only a ball on the batter.

In the situation you presented, by rule, the ball would be dead, the batter would be awarded first base via hit by pitch, and the runner at second would not advance because she is not forced. By rule, the coach does not have the option in this situation.

For those of you interested in searching it, it’s Rule 10.8 Effect 3 in the NCAA Softball Rule Book.

thanks for the update! so the batter being hit takes precedence over the provision that said cancelled only if all runners and batter advance?

[RaginScotsman]

I was going to say ask Troy and Leanna Johnson. They certainly know the rule and how illegal pitches would impact any situation.

[IndiaPaleAle]

thanks for the update! so the batter being hit takes precedence over the provision that said cancelled only if all runners and batter advance?

That is correct.

[R1Letterman]

That is correct.

wow, thanks. cant say i agree it should be that way, but very interesting nonetheless!

[IndiaPaleAle]

wow, thanks. cant say i agree it should be that way, but very interesting nonetheless!

It makes sense in the context of how delayed dead balls and immediate dead balls work. Because a hit-by-pitch results in an immediate dead ball, it negates the delayed dead ball caused by the illegal pitch. Therefore, only the batter and forced runners may advance in this situation.