View Single Post
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 31, 2009, 03:18pm
UmpTTS43 UmpTTS43 is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 425
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteBooth View Post
The FED Interp:

SITUATION 15: With runners at first and second and one out, the batter hits a bounding ball to left field. The runner from second touches third and is obstructed advancing to home. The obstructed runner then interferes with the catcher attempting to make a play on the runner from first advancing to third base. RULING: The penalties are enforced in the order in which the infractions occurred. The runner advancing from second is awarded home. Following the enforcement for the obstruction, the interference is penalized. The runner from first is declared out and the batter-runner is returned to the base he legally occupied at the time of the interference. Had the interference been malicious in nature, the obstructed runner would be declared out in addition to the out on the runner from first. (2-22-1, 2-21-1a, 3-3-1n Penalty, 8-4-2e, 8-4-2g)

Pete Booth
This interpretation makes absolutely no sense and, in my opinion, is totally assinine. Goodie for FED.

In NCAA, the interference supercedes the obstruction. I am pretty sure (could be wrong) the same for OBR with type B obs.

Let's have 2 outs when this sitch happens. I would love to have to explain to a coach that the runner that interfered is allowed to score, even though he interfered prior to scoring.

Last edited by UmpTTS43; Tue Mar 31, 2009 at 03:26pm.
Reply With Quote