Interference in the Yankees-Royals game?

[greymule]

Did anybody see the play just now when Gathright of the Royals hit a dribbler up the 1B line? Wong (Yankee pitcher) fielded it, and Gathright, who had been running in the lane, clearly moved left across the 1B line for the last couple of steps, and was either hit by Wong's throw or blocked the fielder's vision. (Couldn't tell for sure from the replay.)

I know the runner gets to be on the line for the last step, but Gathright was to the left of the line for at least 2 steps, and hit the inside edge of the bag. He also seemed to be lifting his arms more than usual as he ran those last couple of steps.

From what I saw on TV, I'd have called interference.

[Jurassic Referee]

Same question that I was gonna ask.....

The runner hit the inside of the bag with his right foot, and had to step towards the line to do so.

Ruling?

[greymule]

The throw did not draw F3 across the baseline. He appeared to be holding his glove on the fair side when the ball got away.

I don't know what was in Gathright's mind, but he was definitely not lifting his arms to protect his head. His arms were outward.

[LMan]

"it is not INT if the batter-runner's exit of the 45-foot lane is a step, stride, reach, or slide in the immediate vicinity of 1B, with the sole purpose of touching the base." (J/R p.105)

From your description it sounds like the above was not met, but HTBT, I suppose.

[greymule]

"it is not INT if the batter-runner's exit of the 45-foot lane is a step, stride, reach, or slide in the immediate vicinity of 1B, with the sole purpose of touching the base." (J/R p.105)

Absolutely true.

I would have called interference, though, because Gathright moved sharply to his left, from fully in the running lane to well inside the line, two steps before the bag. Either Gathright is a horrible runner or he intentionally interfered. I strongly suspect the latter. Since a Yankee runner was called out on a similar play to end their season last year, I was surprised the Yankees didn't protest.

Maybe they knew they were going to score 10 runs in the 8th.

[bluezebra]

Originally Posted by greymule

"it is not INT if the batter-runner's exit of the 45-foot lane is a step, stride, reach, or slide in the immediate vicinity of 1B, with the sole purpose of touching the base." (J/R p.105)

Absolutely true.

I would have called interference, though, because Gathright moved sharply to his left, from fully in the running lane to well inside the line, two steps before the bag. Either Gathright is a horrible runner or he intentionally interfered. I strongly suspect the latter. Since a Yankee runner was called out on a similar play to end their season last year, I was surprised the Yankees didn't protest.

Maybe they knew they were going to score 10 runs in the 8th.

It's not a protestable situation.

Bob

[greymule]

It's not a protestable situation.

I should have known better than to have used the word protested. Better would have been squawked or argued or something similar. I didn't mean "lodge a protest."

[LomUmp]

Originally Posted by greymule

It's not a protestable situation.

I should have known better than to have used the word protested. Better would have been squawked or argued or something similar. I didn't mean "lodge a protest."

Hey all,

If you are referring to the play when A-Rod intentionally punched the glove to jar the ball loose against the Red Sox, if memory serves, to avoid getting tagged out, there is a big diffference. A-Rod went after the ball to avoid being put out, the other play had the runner going across the base and then running into the first baseman after the out was already acheived.

LomUmp

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by LomUmp

Hey all,

If you are referring to the play when A-Rod intentionally punched the glove to jar the ball loose against the Red Sox, if memory serves, to avoid getting tagged out, there is a big diffference. A-Rod went after the ball to avoid being put out, the other play had the runner going across the base and then running into the first baseman after the out was already acheived.

LomUmp

Wrong play. A-Rod's play was the year before.

In the play the other night, iirc, the ball was past 1B just before the runner's foot hit the bag.

[LomUmp]

Originally Posted by greymule

"it is not INT if the batter-runner's exit of the 45-foot lane is a step, stride, reach, or slide in the immediate vicinity of 1B, with the sole purpose of touching the base." (J/R p.105)

Absolutely true.

I would have called interference, though, because Gathright moved sharply to his left, from fully in the running lane to well inside the line, two steps before the bag. Either Gathright is a horrible runner or he intentionally interfered. I strongly suspect the latter. Since a Yankee runner was called out on a similar play to end their season last year, I was surprised the Yankees didn't protest.

Maybe they knew they were going to score 10 runs in the 8th.

Hey all,

What play is he talking about, then? The A-Rod play was the closest to what he is describing that I can think of. That play had to be last year since A-Rod is only in his second year with the Bronx Bombers.

LomUmp

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by LomUmp

Hey all,

What play is he talking about, then? The A-Rod play was the closest to what he is describing that I can think of. That play had to be last year since A-Rod is only in his second year with the Bronx Bombers.

LomUmp

Um, no, the play wasn't last year. And A-Rod is in his 3rd year with the Yankees. The play with A-Rod was against Boston and happened in 2004.

The play being referred to occurred in game 5 of last year's AL playoffs- Yankees vs. Angels. Robinson Cano of the Yanks was involved.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/recap?gid=251010103

Using Joe West's statement in the 2005 re-cap, Gathright shoulda also been out also t'other night; he was definitely outside of the runner's lane. Not that it makes any nevermind anyway.

[LomUmp]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Um, no, the play wasn't last year. And A-Rod is in his 3rd year with the Yankees. The play with A-Rod was against Boston and happened in 2004.

The play being referred to occurred in game 5 of last year's AL playoffs- Yankees vs. Angels. Robinson Cano of the Yanks was involved.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/recap?gid=251010103

Using Joe West's statement in the 2005 re-cap, Gathright shoulda also been out also t'other night; he was definitely outside of the runner's lane. Not that it makes any nevermind anyway.

Hey all,

I could have sworn that this is only A-Rod's second year...where does the time go? Sorry about the confusion.

LomUmp

[PeteBooth]

Originally Posted by greymule

Did anybody see the play just now when Gathright of the Royals hit a dribbler up the 1B line? Wong (Yankee pitcher) fielded it, and Gathright, who had been running in the lane, clearly moved left across the 1B line for the last couple of steps, and was either hit by Wong's throw or blocked the fielder's vision. (Couldn't tell for sure from the replay.)

I know the runner gets to be on the line for the last step, but Gathright was to the left of the line for at least 2 steps, and hit the inside edge of the bag. He also seemed to be lifting his arms more than usual as he ran those last couple of steps.

From what I saw on TV, I'd have called interference.

IMO, this is the one area in which the Major league baseball umpires differ on.

There was a play similar in the Mets / Houston game over the weekend in which John Mayne the mets pitcher hit a dribbler. The throw was actually caught by F1 but mayne was ruled out for interference.

Then we had the playoffs a few years ago. The infamous Knoblock incident.

Again IMO this is one rule that major league baseball needs to either re-define or come to some sort of uniformity in calling.

Pete Booth