Defensive Indifference

[canyonjoe]

There are lots of unfair scoring rules. Bases loaded and high fly that anyone in the IF can catch but no one makes an attempt and 2 or 3 runs score and they get charged as earned runs. On the other hand if with 2 outs your team makes an error and then you let up 6 HR's in a row none are earned.

 

[Nimrod]

Speaking of unfair scoring: runner on 1st base, batter hits hard line drive to center. cf throws to 2b and runner is out on the force. saw several teams this past week calling that a hit with the runner out advancing to 2nd. from what i can determine, this should be scored a fielder’s choice because of the force. no fielder’s choice if runner safe.

That's a fielder's choice without question. In regard to fairness, it's not much different than line drives that are caught unless the runner misplayed it or didn't hustle, etc., and should've been safe, which does happen quite a bit. That would still be a FC even when it's the runner's fault entirely.

 

[JayW]

That's a fielder's choice without question. In regard to fairness, it's not much different than line drives that are caught unless the runner misplayed it or didn't hustle, etc., and should've been safe. That would still be a FC even when it's the runner's fault entirely.

that’s what i thought. i have this bad habit of looking stuff up when i’m following a game on gamechanger and see something that seems off.

 

[nixxy311]

That's a fielder's choice without question. In regard to fairness, it's not much different than line drives that are caught unless the runner misplayed it or didn't hustle, etc., and should've been safe, which does happen quite a bit. That would still be a FC even when it's the runner's fault entirely.

I've always scored a FC as if the defender had a chance to get the batter out at first but chose to go to a different base. As that hitter would have had a hit if there were no other runners on but they were able to get the lead runner out.

 

[Nimrod]

I've always scored a FC as if the defender had a chance to get the batter out at first but chose to go to a different base. As that hitter would have had a hit if there were no other runners on but they were able to get the lead runner out.

What you're saying makes sense, in that the center fielder's only choice for an out in this example is to get the runner at second, but unfortunately, the rules don't take the word 'choice' literally in that way. A similar example might be a play in which you have runners at 1st and 2nd, and the batter hits a grounder deep in the hole to the shortstop, who makes a diving stop and has only one play - to third - but gets the out 6-5. That's a fielder's choice, not hit for the batter, who would've have a single had the bases been empty.

 

[nixxy311]

What you're saying makes sense, in that the center fielder's only choice for an out in this example is to get the runner at second, but unfortunately, the rules don't take the word 'choice' literally in that way. A similar example might be a play in which you have runners at 1st and 2nd, and the batter hits a grounder deep in the hole to the shortstop, who makes a diving stop and has only one play - to third - but gets the out 6-5. That's a fielder's choice, not hit for the batter, who would've have a single had the bases been empty.

True I would score in that scenario a FC - I think I still have it in my head that it's much harder to get an infield hit

 

[JayW]

What you're saying makes sense, in that the center fielder's only choice for an out in this example is to get the runner at second, but unfortunately, the rules don't take the word 'choice' literally in that way. A similar example might be a play in which you have runners at 1st and 2nd, and the batter hits a grounder deep in the hole to the shortstop, who makes a diving stop and has only one play - to third - but gets the out 6-5. That's a fielder's choice, not hit for the batter, who would've have a single had the bases been empty.

FC makes sense from the results of your example. After the at bat, runners are still at 1 and 2 with one extra out.

 

[Eric F]

But as with getting an error on a ball you dove for and just knocked away, scoring isn’t always fair

If the defensive player misses on a ball she dove for, there's no way I'm scoring that an error. Errors are when they miss on a play that should have been made with "normal effort".

As for "defensive indifference" on a stolen base, this subject was discussed in depth a while back, and someone pointed out that the official rules and guidelines for scoring softball, "defensive indifference" is not included, even though it is in baseball. As was mentioned previously, in a 1st and 3rd situation, with the runner at 1B taking 2B, it's not "indifference". It's a defensive decision to not throw in order to prevent a run. If there are no other runners on the bases, and the advancing runner is ignored, that would be "indifference".

 

[Rick M]

If the defensive player misses on a ball she dove for, there's no way I'm scoring that an error. Errors are when they miss on a play that should have been made with "normal effort".
.

Agree 100%, that was just a nod & wink to Turbo’s thread about diving

Somehow I missed the discussion about defensive indifference not being in the softball rule book. I still feel that it’s unfair to catchers, but I’ll be scoring a lot more stolen bases this spring.

ETA: Or maybe I won’t
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Eric F]

Agree 100%, that was just a nod & wink to Turbo’s thread about diving

Somehow I missed the discussion about defensive indifference not being in the softball rule book. I still feel that it’s unfair to catchers, but I’ll be scoring a lot more stolen bases this spring.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The discussion was quite a while ago. It's not the game rule book. It's the rules and guidelines for scorekeeping (NCAA, I think). I don't have the actual source.