[BigUmp56]

As the others have said, barring an intentional act to interfere, this play was ruled on incorrectly. The J/R cover interference by a teamate as follows.


It is interference if "another teammate":

1. blatantly and avoidably hinders a fielder's try to field a fair or catchable batted ball or
2. thrown ball.

Other offensive teammates must try to avoid a fielder trying to field. If they try to avoid, but contact a fielder, it is not interference. In most cases, another teammate who does not try to avoid contact with a fielder will have interfered. A dugout is dead ball territory but, in most cases, a catch in the dugout is allowed, so offensive team personnel must avoid a fielder trying to catch in their dugout.

3. intentionally hinders or impedes a fielder's try to field a fair or catchable batted ball or thrown ball.


There are times when an on deck batter can interfere without actually having intended to interfere. This is called "willfull indifference." If the on deck batters actions were such that unintentional interferece could have been avoided absent those actions, then it can be interference.


Here's an example of a play where this could apply.


R2 only.... B1 hits a liner to left....On deck batter seeing the bat laying near the front of the plate decides to clear the bat...R2 rounds and barrels home where the throw that's been cut by F6 comes toward the plate....The on deck batter has inadvertanty positions himself directly in front of F2 who is waiting to receive the throw obstructing his ability to field the ball.


Although the actions of the on deck batter did not show intention to interfere with the play, his indifference to that possibility is considered interference.


Tim.