World Series game 6 Trea Turner interference
 

Hi, former NFHS umpire here, but I forgot all the rules. To me, the call of interference looked justified. I probably never would have caught that in a 2 man umpire crew that I used to work.

I would love to hear everyone's opinion.

I can't imagine a reasonably competent umpire who thinks it wasn't called correctly.

I think there can be reasonable discussion on whether the rule should be changed. Mos of the fans / commentators are arguing this point, even if they phrase it as the former.

Right call, and you can get it no matter how many umpires.

Never a popular call
 

I have not ejected people very often in 19 years of umpiring, but I remember very well the ones associated with RLI. Sometimes it was the initial call, sometimes it was sending the other runners back. Lots of misunderstanding with this rule.

Mark, Jr., was at watching the game in a sports bar with a date and very vociferously made the correct call in real time. Both his date and people around him thought that the PU had blown the call and many of them tried to tell he was crazy. Even his date questioned his judgement. She did not know that he umpired H.S. baseball and softball and college softball. When he started quoting chapter and verse everyone around him realized that they had picked the wrong person with whom to debate the play. That's my son, 😁!

MTD, Sr.

I tried to analyze this from two different perspectives in an effort to reconcile the practical with the logical/theoretical. That said, here is what I thought about it:

Practical Perspective: The umpire made the call that we are trained to make based on the location of the runner. While there was discussion about it being a judgement call, the reality of the situation is that the rule regarding the running lane is effectively designed to eliminate the judgement aspect of the call or at least to provide a strong guide or out for umpires to make the call. From this perspective, absolutely the right call. It's the call I'd make in every time if I were in that situation because it is how we're trained and what is expected.

Logical Perspective: The other side of this is that with the benefit of replay (I know it isn't reviewable by rule), I felt the runner was definitely in his last stride toward the bag and the throw would have taken the fielder's glove into the runner regardless of where the runner had been short of sliding (which certainly isn't required). Essentially, my argument is that the call of interference in this situation was based on the position of the runner during the 43.5 feet prior to when he actually contacted the fielder's glove. I don't believe the runner's position at any time prior to that final stride (during which the runner is allowed to exit the running lane) obstructed, hindered, impeded or confused either the pitcher's throw or the first basemen's attempt to catch the throw.

All of that said, I realize my second point doesn't impact how we call games, but it is certainly another way of looking at it and how I'm thinking most people without training/experience viewed the play.

The “last step” exception allows the B/R to legally be outside the lane to touch first base. Otherwise, he’s required to stay in the lane.

We’ll never know if Turner’s action caused the throw to be slightly off-line. What we DO know is that he was out of the lane when he should have been in the lane.

Don’t put me in the position of having to make that call and we won’t have this problem.

My first ever ejection years and years ago was due to a very obvious RLI call.

I was at a bar, came out of the restroom and saw the glove knocked off his hand and said "That's interference!" I didn't say it super loud, unlike a few weeks ago when I woke myself up in the middle of a balk call that I hoped wasn't as loud as I thought it was.

:D