Interference - Judgement, Rules Application, Both
 

I have participated in a number of discussions on this forum that have touched upon the subject of what is and is not a properly protestable erroneous call by an umpire. Most commonly, this involves a "non-call" of runner interference.

I have seen differing opinions on whether or not it could be proper to appeal and/or protest such a decision by the umpires.

What say you?

(Edited to add...)

I set up the poll so that if you choose to respond, you may select more than one choice if you feel it is appropriate. I have tried to include all of the positions I remember being expressed on the question as options.

The only way you're going to win a protest on something like this, is if you go ask umpire what he saw, and WHAT HE SAW is interference, but he's not calling it. You'll likely need him to even say something that indicates he is misapplying the rule. Something like, "No, the runner has the right of way when a fielder is fielding a batted ball - no interference", after admitting he saw contact and the contact prevented a play.

Not an easy one... but possible if he saw what you saw, and is just screwing up the rule.

If the umpire says "I judge it that there was not interference" you cannot protest under the guise of a rule being misapplied.

If the umpire says "running into a fielder who is trying to field a batted ball is not interference, coach" then you can and should protest the call as a rule has been misapplied.

Yeah, what he said. :)

Who voted that "a non-call cannot be appealled or protested?!?!?!"

Catcher sets up on home plate with the ball, and R1 plows her, Pete Rose style. F2 drops the ball and umpire rules safe. You go to discuss the lack of an interference call or ejection of the player, and the umpire says, "That's baseball coach, the runner can do that."

That's a definite protestable non-call.

Wasn't me.

btdt did

for some reason, it shows who voted for what. ive never seen that on a forum ever. EDIT: its set to be a public poll so you can see who voted what, but ive never seen that option before.

Malicious contact is umpire judgement and not protestable.

I find myself in agreement with DG's assertion in regards to malicious contact.

The reason I do is that, unlike Interference, the rules do not provide any objective criteria that an umpire could misapply in determining what is and is not "malicious contact". By rule, it is left entirely up to the umpire's judgement.

I might not LIKE the umpire's call in mcrowder's hypothetical; I might think it was a "really bad" call; but, as hard as I try, I can't conceive of any way that I could validly protest it.

JM

Maybe it wasn't the most perfect example, eh? I think you get the point though - there are numerous "non-calls" that could have been not called because of a misinterpretation of rules. LL's circle rule and leaving early might have been a better example. Not calling an out for passing a runner might be another rules misinterpretation if he saw it and didn't think it was against the rules.

mcrowder,

Sorry, I missed your point.

I would certainly agree that an umpire, in many cases, could "misapply the rules" in failing to make a call.

JM

Here are two quick examples of non balk calls and the subsequent explanation from the umpire's who blew the calls that should have been protested. Of course both were called in one of my sons game, so I'm biased.

Play # 1. R1 only. For whatever reason the pitcher assumed the rubber in the wind up. He steps back with his free foot, turns, and attempts a pickoff of R1.

When the coach of my sons team asked why this wasn't a balk, the umpire told him that as long as the pitcher steps back off of the rubber with either foot, it's not a balk.

Play #2 R1 and R3. LHP from set position steps to first from the rubber and fails to complete the throw.

Coach asks for explanation and the umpire says the pitcher doesn't have to throw to a base if it's occupied.



Tim.

How did mrumpire11 get two votes? I can only manage to vote once on these polls.:confused:

Steve,

When I set up the poll, I selected the option to "allow multiple reponses" - allowing a person to pick more than one choice.

This is the first time I've ever "done" one of these polls, but it appears that once you've voted, there is no way to go back and amend or add to the choices. At least I haven't found one.

JM

CoachJM, do you umpire? What level's do you coach?

Just curious!!

Bob P.

Bob P.,

I have never in my life umpired a "real" baseball game, at any level.

(I say it that way, because I have "umpired" a couple of scrimmage, pre-season, or otherwise completely "meaningless" games - with none of the pressure that would apply in a real game. A significantly different thing from umpiring a "real" game in my mind.)

Over the course of this season, I will be coaching three 14U teams, two travel, one "house". The level of play in the travel leagues I would characterize as "decent", while that in the "house" league is generally "abysmal".

JM

Now it shows me having voted twice, but I only voted the one time. For the record, I voted for both judgment and rules, but only the application can be protested.

You're a shallow, pathetic little man, PWL. You don't know me. I am far from "anal." I did not love to tell you that you were wrong. It pained me terribly. But you needed to know that you were wrong, and I took it upon myself, as did Tim, to point it out. When I am wrong, I'm sure you will be right there piling on me, so don't pull out your halo just yet. When we said that you were not doing your job properly if you have never ejected at least one person in all the years you've been umpiring, we were telling a fact. Don't take it the wrong way. Oops, too late for that.

JM would be thankful to have an umpire like me on his games. I get many compliments every single game, and rarely have any trouble with anyone. I just happen to know what to do if there is trouble. That is what separates competent umpires like myself from the likes of umpires like you.

CoachJM,

You have an admirable grasp of the rules on a theoretical level, for which I commend you. The challenge is to be able to apply that same knowledge while under the pressure of game conditions.

I have always believed that a coach helps himself and his team when he as a firm grasp of the rules. Another correlation I make is that if a coach takes the time to learn the rules, like you have, they more than likely are students of the game and are excellent teacher's of the game.

Welcome and continue to post!!

Bob P.

Bob P.,

Thanks for the kind words. My limited experience with "sort of" umpiring has given me at least some appreciation for the truth of what you say about the challenge of umpiring in a real game.

The thing that has struck me the most is the intense focus and concentration required. Like the first time I had an R1 attempt to steal 2B and the catcher threw down. I believe I made a good call on the play at 2B, but then it slowly dawned on me that both teams were probably going to expect me to call that pitch that had just been thrown. And I couldn't even remember whether or not the batter had swung, let alone what the location of the pitch was. Not to mention the prior count or number of outs. It just kind of all went "poof" when I diverted my attention to the play at 2B.

I'm actually nuts enough to be considering moving over to the "dark side" and trying my hand at umpiring - either "fall ball" this year or spring next year. I would, of course have a lot to learn about proper mechanics & positioning and probably a lot of other stuff I don't even realize I don't know. Plus, I might really suck at it. But I am considering it.

JM

PWL:

I've said it before and I'll say it again. You're the one who has perpetuated this ridiculous fued. Every single time I've tried to explain to you that your methods need adjusting, or that your interpretation of the rules doesn't add up, you've responded like a little child that's been scorned by a school mate. You start throwing out stupid little childish attacks replete with petty name calling as you throw your Internet tantrums. For Gods sakes, man, you've claimed to be a man of nearly 52 years of age, why don't you act like it. If you want to put yourself out there and comment on the rules, be prepared to back it up, and if not, take your medicine like a man when others point out you're wrong. For example, through your posts you've shown repeatedly that you have a limited understanding of the intricacies involved in calling balks, yet when a question comes up regarding a balk call you jump in head first, blind as a bat an try to give advice. Then, when someone points out that you're not giving sound advice you go back into attack mode. These are not signs of a well adjusted man, rather they smack of extreme insecurity and immaturity.


Tim.

John:

If you decide to come over to the deep end of the pool, all you need to do is look me up when you get to Northern Indiana. Me and the boys from my association will be only to glad to point you in the right direction as you begin your journey. Hell, we'll even throw you a life line if you start to drown!


Tim.