I was always under the impression that a baserunner who is hit by a batted ball that was not previously touched by a defensive player was an automatic out.  Last night, I learned that was not necessarily the case, at least according to Little League rules.

Were you aware of this?

Unless he was standing on the bag or interfered with by a fielder, I've always known them to be out.   Maybe you'll be interested in explaining the 'tarded up rules of Little League.

Don't you think it's about time that tec moved on and played in an adult league?

Would you let me know if this explains it sufficiently?

According to the official LL rule book (don't have a copy of it in front of me right now, so I'm paraphrasing as best as I can from memory): if, in the umpire's judgment, a fielder has already had an opportunity to field a ball and failed to do so, and the ball subsequently touches a baserunner, the ball is in play and the runner is still live.  If the umpire's judgement is that the ball hit the runner before the fielder had the opportunity to field it, or if the runner intentionally makes contact with the ball (before or after the fielder has an opportunity to field it), the umpire can call the ball dead and declare the runner out.

Good example: middle infielders playing in.  Ball hit to shortstop.  Ball gets by the shortstop and then hits the runner going to third behind him.  The umpire could rule that the defender had an opportunity to field the ball but missed it, so hitting the runner would not be an automatic out.

I was working one of our district all-star games last night, and a play occurred in the game where this came up.  Two of us assumed "automatic out", but the on-site district official and one of the other guys working with me said "no, umpire's judgment call based on blah, blah, blah . . ..".  They they looked up the exact rule in the rule book to confirm.

Not sure if that also applies to the major leagues.  I suppose it could.

Will "just win baby" be the new catchphrase sweeping Oklahoma City?

It does.  Seems stupid.  But, I guess with kids, you make exceptions for such things.   Runner leading off 2nd, SS holding him on.  SS goes nappy time, pitcher throws a strike, batter rips it up the middle, SS wakes up at the crack of bat and dives for the line drive, ball hits runner leading off 2nd.   To me, the batter is obviously out because the SS is grossly out of position.  But, under those guidelines, the umpire could call it a live ball.  Seems stupid.
 
No one knows what's going on in OKC and even less people care.

Is it safe to assume that you did not know it was indeed also a Major League rule?

(Rule 7.09 (k), I just looked it up.)

I'm guessing you didn't understand "seems stupid" applies to all levels of baseball.    I'm really trying to think of a situation where it could happen if both the fielder and the runner were competent players.   The ONLY situation I can think of is first base.   Holding the runner, pitch is thrown, 1B moves forward to slightly block the runner's view and the runner gets nailed by a wormburner just out of the 1B's reach.  And I'm still having trouble believing it could happen if the runner is paying attention.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/new-york-yankees-doing-fine-with-derek-jeter-on-disabled-list-062811


This article must be a joke, right?

Just a nobody trying to bash a somebody by using a 13 game sample size.    He obviously doesn't remember the great Brian Doyle.

Did you know that last night was the first game in Brewers history that they outhit the opponent but lost by 10+ runs?

It may surprise you but I'm not up on my Brewers history.

I don't believe that to be true.