Double Play

[MTR]

ASA: Case play PLAY 10.1-1 With R1 on 2B, R2 on 1B, B3 hits the ball to F6. R1 holds up as R2 advances to 2B. F6 throws out B3 at 1B and both runners remain on 2B. The defense does not notice and the ball is thrown to F1. No further play is apparent. RULING: The umpire should call “time” and place R2 back on 1B. (8-3E; 10-1)

It is opposite as you remembered. Now, for the $64 question, if in the ASA case play F6 had thrown out R1 at 3rd and the ball is returned to the pitcher in the circle and no further play is apparent but we have two runners standing at 1st, are we advancing R2 to 2nd? It would seem so.

I understand both philosophies. In ASA, we're not going to be allowed to violate 8.3.E prior to the next pitch but the defense doesn't get credit for an out for doing nothing. In NFHS, the resolution to two runners standing on one base with the ball in the pitcher's possession and in the circle must be a look-back violation.

But is there a rule violation in NFHS, or just the Case Play? ASA's case play is based on not forcing one team to violate a rule or the other to make an unwanted play to bail out either team.

[Crabby_Bob]

But is there a rule violation in NFHS, or just the Case Play? ASA's case play is based on not forcing one team to violate a rule or the other to make an unwanted play to bail out either team.

There is no rule quoted with the NFHS case play. Rule 8-3-7 states: Two runners may not legally occupy the same base simultaneously. EFFECT: The runner who first legally occupied the base shall be entitled to it, unless forced to advance. The other runner may be put out by being touched with the ball.

Hence, 8-3-7 requires action by the defense, much like ASA 8.3.E.