Bases Loaded - Interference

[parrothead]

Had a play this weekend, I actually thought the result should of been worse but umps didnt rule that way and other coaches didnt ask.

Bases loaded, ground ball to 2B or SS, the runner moving from 1B to 2B, did not slide and got in the way, intereference was correctly called, thus batter also called out.

Two runs actually scored on the play because the runner from 2B kept going and scored. They required only the second run to return to 3B, not the first.

My OBR and my HS coaching days might be colliding, but I seemed to be under the impression that when you have Interference - that nobody can advance. So in this instance, my interfering runner is out, the batter is out and the runners should have returned to both 2nd and 3rd.

When I asked the umpire after the inning, and said "Im not complaining, but curious" - they said the run scored because the runner crossed home before the interference occurred, which Im not 100% that was true either, but didnt seem to think that was relevant.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by parrothead

Had a play this weekend, I actually thought the result should of been worse but umps didnt rule that way and other coaches didnt ask.

Bases loaded, ground ball to 2B or SS, the runner moving from 1B to 2B, did not slide and got in the way, intereference was correctly called, thus batter also called out.

Two runs actually scored on the play because the runner from 2B kept going and scored. They required only the second run to return to 3B, not the first.

My OBR and my HS coaching days might be colliding, but I seemed to be under the impression that when you have Interference - that nobody can advance. So in this instance, my interfering runner is out, the batter is out and the runners should have returned to both 2nd and 3rd.

When I asked the umpire after the inning, and said "Im not complaining, but curious" - they said the run scored because the runner crossed home before the interference occurred, which Im not 100% that was true either, but didnt seem to think that was relevant.

If this was HS, and this was a FPSR violation, then runners return TOP -- you would be right and the umpires would be wrong.

Otherwise, runners return to TOI.

[parrothead]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

If this was HS, and this was a FPSR violation, then runners return TOP -- you would be right and the umpires would be wrong.

Otherwise, runners return to TOI.

It was OBR, so they got it right I was confusing the rule from my HS coaching days.

[Rich Ives]

In OBR the runner doesn't have to slide or get out of the way. To get a DP in OBR the runner must willfully and deliberately interfere. Just continuing to run is NOT to be considered interference.

Rule 6.01(a )(5) Comment (Rule 7.09(e) Comment): If the batter
or a runner continues to advance after he has been put out,
he shall not by that act alone be considered as confusing, hindering
or impeding the fielders.

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by parrothead

It was OBR, so they got it right I was confusing the rule from my HS coaching days.

The interference was not a willful attempt to break up the DP?

[thumpferee]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

In OBR the runner doesn't have to slide or get out of the way. To get a DP in OBR the runner must willfully and deliberately interfere. Just continuing to run is NOT to be considered interference.

Rule 6.01(a )(5) Comment (Rule 7.09(e) Comment): If the batter
or a runner continues to advance after he has been put out,
he shall not by that act alone be considered as confusing, hindering
or impeding the fielders.

Would this be the same interp under LL, Rich?

Assuming Yes, a LL'er is expected to throw around a retired runner!

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by thumpferee

Would this be the same interp under LL, Rich?

Assuming Yes, a LL'er is expected to throw around a retired runner!

Yes. Yes.