Interference

[hctim14]

OK here's the deal. I am a fairly new umpire. I'm still a senior in high school, but I know the game of baseball like the back of my hand. I mean I sit the bench for my team because we are defending county champs and we have enough talent for 3 teams. So I'm basically another coach. My opinion to my head coach is valued as an equal to his, which is an unusal but beneficial experience. But coaching and umpiring are two different things and I admittedly am unsure of exactly what my call should have been in a game.

Here's the situation: there's a bloop popup in between the catcher and the pitcher to the right side of the infield but fair. In my judgment, the pitcher had a better shot at it, but nonetheless both players pursued the ball. The batter, a big, tall, pudgy kid, gets out of the box and begins to run down the first base line. Somehow, mostly because of his lack of speed, the catcher collides with him while the runner has his back to the play about 6 or 7 feet out of the batter's box. The batter and the catcher fall and the pitcher almost catches the ball but it drops in fair territory. The batter is slow to get up and the pitcher had all day to throw him out, but he makes an errant throw and the batter is safe at first. Immediately, the coach comes out to argue that interference had occurred. At this point, I am honestly unsure of the correctness of my no-call, so I am scrambling in my head to come up with something that sounds like I am confident. After a fairly heated argument, I rule that the catcher made incidental contact with the batter while he was running to first base, and the contact was initiated by the catcher while the batter was within the baseline and actually in foul territory (possibly a stretch but if he was in fair territory he was certainly within the baseline). The coach continues to flip out and declares the game under protest. His team, who was winning 8-3, ends up blowing the lead and loses 9-8.

First, I was wondering if the game can even be placed under protest considering interference is a judgment call to be made by the umpire. Second, I was wondering if I made the right call, because I am honestly not sure. It seemed unfair to declare a batter out for getting hit from behind while running to first base, but I am still unsure of the correct call. Also, I found something that says if the pitcher is declared the fielder with the best opportunity to catch the ball, he is the only player who can be interfered with. Is this true?

[LDUB]

It seems to me like you made the right call. But it is one of those you had to be there plays. I say if the catcher bumped into the back of the batter, let it go. Neither one of them was near the ball, I say just let it go.

I think interference is protestable, but not in your case. Lets say R1, B1 hits towars F4, R1 kicks ball while it is about 10 feet in front of F4. Manager argues that it hit R1 before it passed an infielder and that F4 could have made a play on it. If the umpire agrees with the manager, but says that is not the rule, then I think that is protestable. But I'm not protest master, so I'm probally wrong.

[DG]

First, you can not protest a game based on an umpire's judgement. Second, only one fielder is afforded protection from fielder's interference. If the pitcher has the best chance he is protected. Third, you said the contact was incidental, but then said the catcher initiated the contact. Some might argue obstruction by the catcher, had the batter been knocked down by a catcher who initiated contact. This is one of those had to be there plays, to rule obstruction. But based on what you have written there is no interference by the batter.

[akalsey]

I'd say in most cases if a fielder runs over a runner from behind, there's no interference, but there is obstruction. Dead ball and the batter becomes R1.

The rules (7.09(l)) say it's interference if the runner "fails to avoid a fielder who is attempting to field a batted ball." Running away from the fielder counts in my judgement as attempting to avoid.

OBR also gives some advice in the case of a collision between a catcher and a batter runner (still in 7.09(l)):

When a catcher and batter runner going to first base have contact when the catcher is fielding the ball, there is generally no violation and nothing should be called. "Obstruction" by a fielder attempting to field a ball should be called only in very flagrant and violent cases because the rules give him the right of way, but of course such "right of way" is not a license to, for example, intentionally trip a runner even though fielding the ball. If the catcher is fielding the ball and the first baseman or pitcher obstructs a runner going to first base "obstruction" shall be called and the base runner awarded first base.

Also, I found something that says if the pitcher is declared the fielder with the best opportunity to catch the ball, he is the only player who can be interfered with. Is this true?

Yup. Same rule -- 7.09(l) says that the umpire determines which fielder "is entitled to the benefit of" the interference rule. If the pitcher was the one who was going to catch it, the catcher can't be interfered with while fielding because he's not fielding the ball. He's just running around the field.

You say you made a judgement call that the pitcher was the one who was fielding the ball. The runner didn't touch him, therefore no interference and no protest allowed.