Interference

[David Emerling]

Curious in some opinions on the following play.

R3, no outs. Swinging bunt down the 1st base line. Ball is rolling just to the right of the foul line (in foul territory) and has a chance of becoming fair. The pitcher approaches the ball and is attempting to pick it up to keep it foul when he collides with the batter-runner. The pitcher is knocked down, preventing him from picking up the ball. The ball continues to roll, yet, remains in foul territory.

Interference?

Obstruction?

Nothing?

Would it matter if the ball eventually rolls into fair territory?

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

[Edited by David Emerling on Jul 28th, 2005 at 12:21 PM]

[Matthew F]

That's a good one Dave. I'm still scratching my head...

Since F1 is fielding the ball (and it was a swinging bunt), I'm assuming this stitch didn't occur in the general vicinity of home plate, which "no call" is generally made if contact occurs.

If F1 was in the act of fielding the ball (per your stitch), he should be protected and interference would be called. What I don't know for sure, is if the fact it's also a foul ball would have an impact on the ruling? I guess I would get an earful when I called the ball dead on the interference and then the runner out.

[jicecone]

Originally posted by David Emerling
Curious in some opinions on the following play.

R3, no outs. Swinging bunt down the 1st base line. Ball is rolling just to the right of the foul line (in foul territory) and has a chance of becoming fair. The pitcher approaches the ball and is attempting to pick it up to keep it foul when collides with the batter-runner. The pitcher is knocked down, preventing him from picking up the ball. The ball continues to roll, yet, remains in foul territory.

Interference?

Obstruction?

Nothing?

Would it matter if the ball eventually rolls into fair territory?

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

"Offensive Interference is an act by the team at bat, which interfers with, obstructs, impedes, hinders or confuses any fielder attempting to make a play." OBR2.00

Had the ball been a pop-up and foul would it have been any different. The ball was being played on, and the status of the ball was not determined until it was touched by the fielder, passed first base or a ball that settled on either fair or foul territory.

Based only upon what was reported, I would have had to call interference.

[PeteBooth]

Originally posted by David Emerling

Curious in some opinions on the following play.

R3, no outs. Swinging bunt down the 1st base line. Ball is rolling just to the right of the foul line (in foul territory) and has a chance of becoming fair. The pitcher approaches the ball and is attempting to pick it up to keep it foul when collides with the batter-runner. The pitcher is knocked down, preventing him from picking up the ball. The ball continues to roll, yet, remains in foul territory.

Interference?

Obstruction?

Nothing?

The applicable rule reference is:

OBR 7.08
Any runner is out when_ (b) He intentionally interferes with a thrown ball; or hinders a fielder attempting to make a play on a batted ball; A runner who is adjudged to have hindered a fielder who is attempting to make a play on a batted ball is out whether it was intentional or not.

Notice the rule doesn't say anything about whether the ball is Fair / Foul and for very good reason otherwise on a foul pop-up a runner would purposely interfere with a fielder to avoid being out.

We do not call INTERFERENCE "after the fact". When we judge interference it is called right away and the ball is Immediately dead in most instances. When Interference is called SOMEBODY is out in this case B1.

Pete Booth

[officialtony]

Pete wrote:

" The applicable rule reference is:

OBR 7.08
Any runner is out when_ (b) He intentionally interferes with a thrown ball; or hinders a fielder attempting to make a play on a batted ball; A runner who is adjudged to have hindered a fielder who is attempting to make a play on a batted ball is out whether it was intentional or not.

We do not call INTERFERENCE "after the fact". When we judge interference it is called right away and the ball is Immediately dead in most instances. When Interference is called SOMEBODY is out in this case B1. "

Pete Booth



Tony writes:

Pete I agree with everything but your last sentence.
Shouldn't the RUNNER be out per OBR 7.08?
I would have ruled interference on the runner and called him out and placed the batter on 1st. Would that have been the wrong procedure?
Did you mean R1 and not B1.

Thanks for clearing this up for me.

[Edited by officialtony on Jul 28th, 2005 at 09:10 AM]

[PeteBooth]

Originally posted by officialtony

Tony writes:

Pete I agree with everything but your last sentence.
Shouldn't the RUNNER be out per OBR 7.08?
I would have ruled interference on the runner and called him out and placed the batter on 1st. Would that have been the wrong procedure?
Did you mean R1 and not B1.

When B1 HIT the ball his status is no longer that of a batter but a runner. B1 is more frequently described as a BR (Batter turned runner).

In the scenario given, B1 is the one who interfered so the call is:

1. TIME
2. That's Interference
3. B1 is out
4. R3 returned to third base

NOTE: the status of the ball was not yet determined, so returning R3 to third might be a moot point if the ball remained foul.

Pete Booth

[officialtony]

OOPS!
My bad.
I had R3 interfering.
So sorry.
Please return to interacting with others who can read the posts correctly.
You are 100% correct.

[wyatt]

In the J/R - page 100 in my edition, example 1 under "Examples: Runner/Fielder Contact, Not Interference"

"The batter chops a ball along the first base line in foul territory. The pitcher is reaching for it, but cannot touch it because of contact by the BR. The ball, untouched, rolls foul: no interference, foul ball."


Hmmmmmmm.

[mikebran]

WHAT the the Flying @#horse g@#randma is a STITCH?

Originally posted by Matthew F
I'm assuming this stitch

[3appleshigh]

is another word for 'Thread' in this instance, it is also a word used in sewing ie. stitch up a pant leg, and in the medical profession he took 25 stitches. But on a forum it is talking about the thread - or the post. I cannot find an reference to the internet lingo for this word, but that is to what it refer's.

here is the definition I could find:

STITCH

NOUN:

A single complete movement of a threaded needle in sewing or surgical suturing.

A single loop of yarn around an implement such as a knitting needle.
The link, loop, or knot made in this way.
A mode of arranging the threads in sewing, knitting, or crocheting: a purl stitch.
A sudden sharp pain, especially in the side. See Synonyms at pain.
Informal An article of clothing: wore not a stitch.
Informal The least part; a bit: didn't do a stitch of work.
A ridge between two furrows.
VERB:
stitched , stitch·ing , stitch·es
VERB:
tr.


To fasten or join with or as if with stitches.
To mend or repair with stitches: stitched up the tear.
To decorate or ornament with or as if with stitches: "The sky was stitched with stars" (Mario Puzo).
To fasten together with staples or thread.
VERB:
intr.

To make stitches; sew.

IDIOM:
in stitches Informal
Laughing uncontrollably.

[David Emerling]

Originally posted by wyatt
In the J/R - page 100 in my edition, example 1 under "Examples: Runner/Fielder Contact, Not Interference"

"The batter chops a ball along the first base line in foul territory. The pitcher is reaching for it, but cannot touch it because of contact by the BR. The ball, untouched, rolls foul: no interference, foul ball."


Hmmmmmmm.

Do you think the ruling would be any different if the ball eventually rolled into FAIR territory even though, at the time of the "interference", the ball was in foul territory?

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by 3appleshigh
is another word for 'Thread' in this instance, it is also a word used in sewing ie. stitch up a pant leg, and in the medical profession he took 25 stitches. But on a forum it is talking about the thread - or the post. I cannot find an reference to the internet lingo for this word, but that is to what it refer's.

here is the definition I could find:

STITCH

NOUN:

A single complete movement of a threaded needle in sewing or surgical suturing.

A single loop of yarn around an implement such as a knitting needle.
The link, loop, or knot made in this way.
A mode of arranging the threads in sewing, knitting, or crocheting: a purl stitch.
A sudden sharp pain, especially in the side. See Synonyms at pain.
Informal An article of clothing: wore not a stitch.
Informal The least part; a bit: didn't do a stitch of work.
A ridge between two furrows.
VERB:
stitched , stitch·ing , stitch·es
VERB:
tr.


To fasten or join with or as if with stitches.
To mend or repair with stitches: stitched up the tear.
To decorate or ornament with or as if with stitches: "The sky was stitched with stars" (Mario Puzo).
To fasten together with staples or thread.
VERB:
intr.

To make stitches; sew.

IDIOM:
in stitches Informal
Laughing uncontrollably.

It's most likely to be a mis-spelling of "sitch" which is a common abbreviation of "situation" on official's boards.

"Stitch" another word for "thread"?

Lah me.

[Matthew F]

It's my understanding that if the BR intentionally contacts a batted ball that has a chance of becoming fair, he's guilty of interference - Correct?

[wyatt]

Originally posted by David Emerling

Do you think the ruling would be any different if the ball eventually rolled into FAIR territory even though, at the time of the "interference", the ball was in foul territory?

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Maybe yes - but I can't find anything in the J/R about it. The fact that the ball was foul and stays foul seems to make this a no interference sitch according to J/R.

Then again maybe F1 isn't considered to be making a play on a foul ball on the ground since there is no play to be made.

When the ball crosses to fair maybe F1 becomes protected at that point but I have no citation on that.

[carldog]

Good question here, I would say, and not yet a clear resolution.

Pete Booth has the rule reference that seems to say it is interference regardless of the fair/foul status of the ball at the time of contact...and Wyatt has a J/R reference that seems to say it is not interference if the ball stays foul.

And so,.....