View Single Post
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Sun Mar 03, 2002, 02:32pm
Bfair Bfair is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 813
Quote:
Originally posted by spots101
Play #2 - B1 hits ground ball to F6. R1 on 2B times it just right to where he lets the ball pass right in front of him and this action causes F6 to misplay the ball. From my position (I was by myself) it appeared to me that the ball hit the runner. Therefore I called interference on R1. Did I make the right call?
Also, what if the runner jumps directly over the ball?
Spots, you will often see this play (or those similar to it) when officiating. Sometimes it is interference, and other times it's merely R2's need to avoid getting hit with the batted ball (per rule).

Evans in the JEA under 7.08(b) states:
    Any action, however, that is taken by the runner which is palpably designed to interfere should be ruled interference.

What he is saying is if it appears to you (you judge) that he is intentionally trying to interfere, then provide that runner the credit for being successful in his attempt to interfere and make the interference call. Realize, that you are judging intent and supporting it with the JEA's statement.

In your example, since you state you felt the ball struck the runner before passing a fielder, then the correct call definitely is interference. However, let's suppose R2 did his little "mambo" in front of F6 and you now have to decide if he interfered.

One standard I consistently apply is that if R2 does his "mambo" and takes off running allowing the ball to pass behind him (or he jumps the ball), then I quickly and loudly rule the interference before the ball even arrives to F6. If the runner were fearful of being hit (the excuse they will always tell you), then WHY did he delay his effort and still decide to advance BEFORE the ball passed in front of him? His delay only cost him time of getting out of the way of the ball sooner if he was advancing before the ball got there. To me, that proves his intent to interfere by attempting to hinder the sight or thoughts of F6.

However, if R2 does his "mambo" and allows the ball to pass in front of him (putting himself at risk at 3B), then he has now bought himself the excuse that he was worried about the ball hitting him and waited for it to pass. By allowing the ball to pass in front of him, he has now legitimized his excuse for waiting.

Finally, if R2 runs to 3B without hesitation and avoids extremely close proximity to the fielder (he should not make it appear as if he intends to crash the fielder), even if he must leap the ball, then I have no interference. He is doing what he is supposed to be doing in attempting to safely acquire his advance base.

Those are the standards that I apply, and I feel they are supported well by the rule and by the JEA.


Just my opinion,

Freix



Reply With Quote