|
[/B][/QUOTE]
A fielder must be "protected" before a runner can be guilty of unintentional interference. Only one fielder can be protected at a time.
Jaksa/Roder says the following regarding a "protected" fielder.
A fielder is "trying to field" (or "in the act of fielding") a ball when ...
(1) he is positioning himself for the purpose of trying to glove a rapidly approaching ball, or
(2) he is actually gloving the ball, or has gloved the ball and, without having to take steps, is trying to gain possession of the ball, or
(3) he is actually throwing the ball, or completing his throwing motion after throwing the ball ("following through").
However, your play is not very typical since it involves a fielder having to travel some distance to reach a fly ball.
Jaksa/Roder seems to make an exception in this area. When a fielder has to travel some distance to get to a fly ball, and the ball has not yet reached its apex, any contact between the runner and fielder is probably incidental. In other words, it's nothing.
Of course, anything a runner does that is intentional is always interference. We're only talking about interference that is unintentional here.
Back to your play.
It can not be interference if another fielder was the more logical/probable player to make the play on the batted ball. Even if F3 could have made the play - if F4 had a better play, then only F4 is afforded the protection from unintentional interference. That probably wasn't the case in your situation.
Also, if the batted ball had not yet reached it's apex the runner is given a little latitude and, failing anything intentional, would probably be exempt from interference from a fielder on the move to make a catch. Such contact would be "incidental" ... according to the authoritative opinion of Jaksa/Roder.
The bottom line is that your play is probably a Had-To-Be-There type of play.
Either way, this is a judgment call on your part.
Hope this helps.
David Emerling
Memphis, TN
[/B][/QUOTE]
David brings up a good and correct point. A similiar situation was covered on a past MLB "You Make the Call Section." The play was something to the effect of two fielders going after a batted ground ball, when the runner on second collided with a fielder. The correct ruling was obstruction, because the fielder he collided with was not the one deemed to be making a play, the other fielder had a better shot at making the play. I also agree with the interfernce call you made in your game, it sounds like the runner interfered with the first baseman.
|