Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bkr43050
I am hoping to get some clarification on a ruling that we have have incurred (yes I am a coach so take it easy on me  ) in each of our first 2 ball games this season. The response we have received in each situation has been different which leads to further confusion. We have young, inexperienced umpires so we try to take that into consideration. However it would be great if they could to instructed correctly so that they can be consistent from one umpire to the next. So here is the situation. (Little League rules)
There is a runner on 3rd and a pitch results in a passed ball. The R3 comes to the plate and F2 is tracking down the ball at the backstop while F1 covers the plate. This is all status quo at this point. The batter (B1) never leaves the box nor makes an attempt to do so. In both instances the ball had bounced somewhat toward the 3rd base dugout and the batter is right handed which puts him in direct line of the play. The first time it happens F2 picks up the ball and starts to throw to F1 and stops because B1 is directly in between. The umpire was questioned as to whether it was obstruction and he determined that it was and he sent all runners back to original base (there was an R2 moved up to R3). Later after the game we were told that his ruling was not completely correct and that an attempt needed to be made on the play. So we instructed the F2 to throw the ball regardless of the B1 being present. So the next game when he gets the same situation he does as instructed and throws it only this time it gets by F1 by going up the 3rd base line a few feet. It appeared that F2 tried to throw wide of B1 but that is merely speculation. So this time nothing is called and again the umpire is questioned as to why it is not obstruction. This time we are told that the B1 is entitled to the box and can remain there so long as the ball does not hit him. My thought on this is that he has obstructed regardless of whether the ball hits him. I have looked back through several threads on here but have not found any discussions on this same situation. If there is already one here a simple point in the right direction would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance. I think this site is a great resource for educating both umpires and coaches. |
Coach,
First of all I have to laugh. You are the first coach I have ever heard use the term "obstruction" when the violation in question is actually "interference." It is an inside joke among umpires that it is common among coaches that they use the word "interference" almost universally for everything, including "obstruction." For your information, obstruction (OBS) is a violation committed by defensive players (without the ball) who hinder a runner. Interference (INT) is a violation committed by offensive players who hinder fielders in the act of fielding the ball or making a play.
Now to your questions.... There is a rule that requires offensive personnel to vacate any area where the defense has be to make a play. This means that when a runner from 3B is attempting to score, the batter is NOT entitled to remain in the box. It does not give the batter immunity from INT "so long as the ball does not hit him." However, merely staying in the box is not by itself automatically INT when a runner from 3B is attempting to score. There has to be an actual interference and, if #1) the batter had an opportunity to move away, and #2) in the umpire's judgment his presence in the box caused increased difficulty or hindered the defense's play on R3, then an INT call would be correct.
If INT were called on a batter when a runner from 3B is attempting to score the penalty would be, if there is less than two outs, R3 is declared out (not sent back) and all other runners return to their base at the time of the pitch. If there is two outs, the batter is declared out and no run may score.
An important point to make is about condition #1 above,
the batter had an opportunity to move away. The rules do not expect a batter to evaporate. The batter has the right to hit the pitch. So he can stay there if he wants to if he wishes to attempt to hit the ball. If the runner arrives at the same time as the pitch (impossible in LL) then the presence of the batter can not he held against him for an INT call. In LL games, where runners must stay on the base until the ball reaches the batter this situation is next to impossible. Once the ball passes the batter, he no longer has any reason to be in the box and should get out of the way.
However, if he does have a brain freeze and he does stay there in the box it is not automatically INT unless he actually interferes!
I hope this helps!