View Single Post
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Fri Sep 05, 2003, 06:32am
IRISHMAFIA IRISHMAFIA is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally posted by greymule
If in this example, the umpire delayed the call slightly and the fielder threw the BR out, then it could be perhaps that R1 attempted to interfere but actually didn't. (He can still be ejected for USC if so warrented.)

This brings up an interesting question. In the case of the batter who throws the bat in anger and then the ball goes over the fence, the call is now out for USC and the runner on 3B goes back. If as in the example above, the umpire waits until the play is over, would a subsequent ejection of R1 for his USC put him out also? If so, we have our two outs. Or does the fact that the USC occurred before the out mean that the USC takes precedence and nullifies the out that occurred afterward?

Abel on 1B. Baker gets a single and on his way to 1B looks back and calls the umpire an obscene name. Abel is thrown out at 3B. Now the ump ejects Baker. Two outs, I guess.

Is an ejection of a runner for USC always an out? If the batter is out for throwing his bat even if the ball goes over the fence, is he out if he throws his bat because he didn't like the call on strike 2?
Speaking ASA

Whether it is throwing the bat, making gestures, nasty comments, hitting someone, etc., if it is flagrant enough for you to consider it unsportsmanlike conduct, then it is an out. Cannot call one without the other if the reason for the call was USC.

As far as hesitating on a possible interference call, I think that is appropriate as you must ascertain if the offensive player's actions actually interfered with the play. However, you don't wait to the end of the play to make that determination. You can only make that call on the part of the play being executed in which the interference would have been effected.

For example, in the scenario offered, if the fielder makes a clean play after the offensive players actions, they obviously didn't interfere with his ability to make the play. Any subsequent action stands on it's own merit. You cannot call interference if somewhere along the way, something went awry in the play.

__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote