<b>PLAY</b>: Runner on first. B1 laces a liner to the gap in right-center. R1 rounds second, is going full speed for third, and looks as though he's going for home.

The third base coach moves down the line, in the runner's projected path, with his hands raised over his head. R1 rounds third and crashes into his coach, both of them falling to the ground.

In the meantime, the BR had rounded first and was steaming toward second. He reached second and rounded it a bit too far.

F9 had retrieved the ball, and fired his relay to F4. F4 turned, saw R1 and his coach collide and fall to the ground, and then fired to second just in time for F6 to tag out the BR diving back to second.

F6 turns and fires to F5. R1 scrambles back to third just in time before F5's tag touches him on his back.

Your ruling please.

(We'll see how y'all fare on this one, and then I'll bring out the interp of the week.)

I've got no coach's interference -- play stands as called.

Rather interesting. If I felt that R1 intended to go home, I would call interference on the coach and ring up R1, otherwise the play stands as called.

"in the runner's projected path" (vs. in his line of vision)

and

"with his hands raised over his head" (STOP!!)



I know the fabled "judgement" applies here but if I were on defense I'd probally say something like "Sure looked deliberate from here!"

I'd look at the "physically assists" part of 7.09(i). The coach certainly didn't physically assist R1 in leaving 3rd and it doesn't sound like he physically assisted him in returning to 3rd. So at most he physically assisted him in stopping albeit a bit abruptly.

Given all that, I'd say there is <b>NO interference</b> by the coach in this case.

Ain't got nuttin'
 

I don't have a call here but what happens on the play.

I simply ask for the trainer to check the coach out.

And we probably have a good laugh at the coach's expense.

Thanks
David

<i> Originally posted by Jim Porter </i>

<b> The third base coach moves down the line, in the runner's projected path, with his hands raised over his head. R1 rounds third and crashes into his coach, both of them falling to the ground. </b>

Jim others have responded by saying Nothing - I happen to agree with them but my gut tells me there's more to it, otherwise why would you post it. So here goes - I'll say interference and site the following:

4.05 (b) Base coaches shall be limited to two in number and shall (1) be in team uniform, and (2) remain within the coach's box at all times.
PENALTY: It is also common practice for a coach who has a play at his base to leave the coach's box to signal the player to slide, advance or return to a base. This may be allowed if the <b> coach does not interfere with the play in any manner. </b>

Since the coach left the coaches box, I would say that leaves him in jeopardy of being called on the interference penalty. The term any manner IMO means just that <b> ANY MANNER </b> and since he left the box and was in the way of the runner that could be defined as interference in any manner.

If he had stayed in the box (where he is supposed to be) and was waving his arms etc. and the runner ran into him then I would have nothing.

ok let's see how I do when you respond.

Pete Booth

When I hear "interfere with the play" I hear "interfere with the defense trying to make a play". Didn't happen here. No interference. Play stands. Cite all the rules you want. Play stands.

Coach "physically assisted" runner and guilty of interference. Probably prevented his arse from being thrown out at the plate. Call R1 out and leave the ball alive [since R1 is not being played on by the defense] for the defense to attempt additional outs. BR is also out on the continuing play since the ball is left alive.

I got nutten.I think from the description the third base coach was just in the wrong place at the right time. Besides he definitely wasn't helping the runner RETURN to the base. Judgement call-- if he was planning on it I don't think he would have been standing there looking like he was in a hold-up.


rex

Update: Clarification - which rules?
 

Going back in time for a moment..... regarding this situation, which rules did you want applied to this situation? (i.e. O.B.R., N.C.A.A., or Fed.)

Since the Fed. season is upon us, this might be of some
importance to Fed. umpires'.

N.F.H.S.
Situation #12: With R1 on second base, R2 on first base and two out, B5 get a hit to center field. R1 touches third base and advances to home as the throw from F8 comes to the plate. R2 has touched second base and third base when he collides with the third-base coach who is in the baseline watching the possible play at home plate. Before R1 touches home plate, the throw is cut off and thrown to third base where R2 slides back safely.
Ruling: The play stands with R1 scoring, R2 at third base and B5 at second base. This is not interference by the third-base coach. If he were to assist R2 in getting up, this would then be interference by the coach. (2-21-1c)

[Edited by Rog on Mar 12th, 2001 at 07:05 AM]

Re: Update: Clarification - which rules?
 

Rog:

I'm not sure what your problem is. The play has been explained to you by several umpires several times. <b>The FED play is not relevant.</b> In the exciting play the base coach went into the base line to stop the runner.

In the FED play the base coach wasn't even watching the runner. Note that the baseline in this instance would most likely have been in foul territory.

You remind me of The Little Prince, who once he had asked a question, never let it go.

Roger: Interference in the original play! Under <b>any</b> set of rules.