Interference by BR

[greymule]

A certain softball code prescribes what I consider to be perverse rulings on certain plays. So I'm trying to use OBR as a benchmark to understand the "legal" reasoning behind why these perversities could not happen in baseball.

Play A

No outs. Abel on 3B and Baker on 2B are both off on a suicide squeeze. Charles bunts but pops the ball toward F3. Abel slides across the plate and Baker stops at 3B. Seeing that F3 will catch the ball, Charles deliberately grabs F3's glove.

I would call Charles out for interference, and because of the willful and deliberate nature of the interference, I would also call Abel out as the runner closest to home, even though he was across the plate at the time of the interference. I would send Baker back to 2B.

Play B

Same situation, except that Charles tried to avoid F3 but bumped him anyway as F3 at the last moment reached toward Charles for the ball.

Obviously Charles is out and no bases can be run, but I'm not sure about calling a second out.

Play C

Same situation as A or B except that F3 catches the ball anyway and throws immediately to F5, who tags 3B on the appeal on Abel and then tags Baker for a triple play.

I think that even if I had called interference as soon as it occurred, I'd let the triple play stand. But I don't know that I could support this by the book.

Play D

Abel on 3B, no outs. Suicide squeeze. Baker pushes a nice bunt up the 1B line and Abel scores easily. Then, as Baker is running toward 1B, he drops his bat, and it hits the ball in fair territory.

Obviously Baker is out, but does the "no runners may advance" clause in 7.09 (b) still apply to Abel if he scored before the infraction?

What do you think?

[tibear]

Play A - Exactly as you called it
Play B - If the interference is not intentional then Charles is out and Abel and Baker return to their at-time-of-pitch base. (2nd&3rd)
Play C - Since the interference didn't affect the defense, the interference is ignored.
Play D - If in the judgement of the umpire, Charles bat hitting the ball was completely by accident then nothing is called. If Charles is deemed to have thrown the bat at the ball, then he is out and runners return to their at-time-of-pitch base(2nd&3rd)

[btdt]

Play C
Either it is interference or not.
This is not a situation where you ignore anything. Was it? Wasn't it?
If it is interference, doesn't matter if affected the defense or not.
Immediate dead ball, B/R out, evryone back to TOP

[greymule]

If in the judgement of the umpire, Charles bat hitting the ball was completely by accident then nothing is called.

Can't agree with you there, tibear. Bat hits ball in fair territory, intent is immaterial. Charles is out.

Ball rolls up against bat is different.

Thanks for your responses.

[tibear]

greymule,

If you notice the second part of my answer.

I guess what my intent was, if the ball hits the bat then no call, however, if the bat hits the ball then interference is called. In this instance once interference is called ALL runners return to their TOP base, timing is not a consideration.

[tibear]

btdt:
"6.06 (c) He interferes with the catcher’s fielding or throwing by stepping out of the batter’s box or making any other movement that hinders the catcher’s play at home base. EXCEPTION: Batter is not out if any runner attempting to advance is put out, or if runner trying to score is called out for batter’s interference.
Rule 6.06(c) Comment: If the batter interferes with the catcher, the plate umpire shall call “interference.” The batter is out and the ball dead. No player may advance on such interference (offensive interference) and all runners must return to the last base that was, in the judgment of the umpire, legally touched at the time of the interference.
If, however, the catcher makes a play and the runner attempting to advance is put out, it is to be assumed there was no actual interference and that runner is out—not the batter. Any other runners on the base at the time may advance as the ruling is that there is no actual interference if a runner is retired. In that case play proceeds just as if no violation had been called."

Here is a situation with a batter where the interference is ignored because it didn't affect the play. I believe the same rule would apply to baserunning interference as it would to batter interference.

Interference is interference and if you can ignore it in one instance you should be able to ignore it in another.

[PeteBooth]

[

Play C

Same situation as A or B except that F3 catches the ball anyway and throws immediately to F5, who tags 3B on the appeal on Abel and then tags Baker for a triple play.

I think that even if I had called interference as soon as it occurred, I'd let the triple play stand. But I don't know that I could support this by the book.

You are quoting the incorrect rule code. As soon as B1 hit the ball towards F3 his/her status is now of a runner not a batter. We do not "wave off" interference. As soon as B1 interfered with F3 the call is

1. TIME
2. That's Interference
3. B1 is out, others return to TOP bases EXCEPT if you deem the interference to be intentional in which case R3 is also out.

As soon as the Umpire says TIME, the play is dead regardless of what happens afterwards. From my experience, once you as an umpire call TIME play stops anyway.

Here is another example; R1 interferes with F4, however, F4 still manages to get the throw off to F6 to complete the 4-6-3 DP. As soon as we rule interference, the play is dead and unless we judge R1's act of interference to be intentional, we call R1 out and leave B1 at first.

Interference is an IMMEDIATE dead ball. We do not Wait to enforce or enforce AFTERWARDS. Exception: If B1 interferes with F2 but F2 throws out the runner, in that case the interference is waved off.

Reference OBR rule 7

Pete Booth

[tibear]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

[

You are quoting the incorrect rule code. As soon as B1 hit the ball towards F3 his/her status is now of a runner not a batter. We do not "wave off" interference. As soon as B1 interfered with F3 the call is

1. TIME
2. That's Interference
3. B1 is out, others return to TOP bases EXCEPT if you deem the interference to be intentional in which case R3 is also out.

As soon as the Umpire says TIME, the play is dead regardless of what happens afterwards. From my experience, once you as an umpire call TIME play stops anyway.

Here is another example; R1 interferes with F4, however, F4 still manages to get the throw off to F6 to complete the 4-6-3 DP. As soon as we rule interference, the play is dead and unless we judge R1's act of interference to be intentional, we call R1 out and leave B1 at first.

Interference is an IMMEDIATE dead ball. We do not Wait to enforce or enforce AFTERWARDS. Exception: If B1 interferes with F2 but F2 throws out the runner, in that case the interference is waved off.

Reference OBR rule 7

Pete Booth

I recognize what your saying. However, if you look at the play, did interference really occur. The BR attempted to interfere with F3 but was unsuccessful because F3 still made the catch, so in fact there was no interference.

I was looking at the rulesofbaseball.com website where it has a test quiz question very similar to this one where there is R2 and the Batter bunts towards first. The BR is running illegally towards first and is "grazed" by a thrown ball from the catcher but F3 still catches the ball to register the out, R2 continues on and scores on the play. The website indicates that it is a grey area because most umpires would immediately call interference and call the play dead, however they indicate that most professional umpires would ignore the interference and let the run score. Their interpretation is that the rulebook states that it is up to the umpire to determine if interference really occured and in this case since the out was registered, no interference took place.

[Delaware Blue]

Originally Posted by tibear

btdt:
"6.06 (c) He interferes with the catcher’s fielding or throwing by stepping out of the batter’s box or making any other movement that hinders the catcher’s play at home base. [/B]"

Here is a situation with a batter where the interference is ignored because it didn't affect the play.

You're attempting to apply the wrong rule. 6.06(c) on applies when the batter interferes with the catcher attempting to make a play on another runner, i.e. a runner stealing second or third. 6.06(c) is not relevant since it applies only to the catcher and does not apply in the case of a batted ball. From JEA on 6.06(c) This rule encompasses any and all play by the catcher in which he is trying to retire a runner. It includes attempts to pick runners off base and attempts to prevent stolen bases.

Rule 7.09 applies in this situation: It is interference by a batter or a runner when -- ( j) He fails to avoid a fielder who is attempting to field a batted ball... PENALTY FOR INTERFERENCE: The runner is out and the ball is dead.

As soon as the batter becomes a runner, his status changes. He's no longer a batter and he, like any runner, must avoid contacting a defensive player making a play on a batted ball. If he doesn't, it's interference plain and simple. It doesn't matter whether the defensive player actually makes the play. There is no delayed dead ball. The ball is dead immediately, the BR is out, and runners return to their TOP bases.

Example, R1 and R2, one out. BR hits a ground ball to F6. R2 bumps F6 (by accident) just as he is about to field the ball. Despite the bump, F6 fields the ball and flips to F4 for the force out on R1. F4 makes the relay to F3 in time to retire the slow-footed BR. According to your application of interference, the double play stands - but it doesn't. It's interference the moment R2 bumped F6, the ball is dead, R2 is out, and the BR is awarded first base. R1 is advanced to second base.

[LMan]

DB and JB are right on point...once INT is called, NOTHING happens after that point.....succeeding action is irrelevant...including catching a thrown ball, runner scoring, whatever. The ball is d-e-d dead. That thrown ball that 'grazed' the runner (who was out of the lane)? You either immediately call INT and kill the ball, or you don't. If you do, no playing action after that moment matters. If you don't, you can't call it later after F3 catches the ball and then try to make awards.

You really have to look at the differences between batter-runner/runner, batted ball/thrown ball, and INT/OBS. Each of these is addressed differently in the rules and their understanding is absolutely critical.

[tibear]

OK. I think I see where the problem lies. There are way too many situations to call interference and the call changes depending on the situation.

Why wouldn't the powers that be simply have one rule for interference? Wouldn't it make more sense to have one rule rather than one rule for the batter another for runners and yet another for batter/runner?

From everyone's standpoint(umpire, player, coach and fan) wouldn't it simply be easier if an umpire says interference happens and this is the procedure:
1 Time
2 Call interference
3 player who caused interference is out and possibly 2nd out if intentional

No wonder the average fan, and most baseball commentators, don't know the rules because they change depending on the situation.

Try keeping the rules as simple as possible and its easier on everyone. One of my favorite confusing rules for the average fan is the infield fly. It states that with less than two outs and runners on 1st and 2nd or 1st, 2nd and 3rd .... I would recommend that they remove the "or 1st, 2nd and 3rd" because it is immaterial. It adds information that simply confuses people, if there are runners at 1st and 2nd with less then two out you have an infield fly situation. Most people can't get by the runner situation never mind throwing in batter automatically out and runners running at their own peril, fair/fowl implecations, etc.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by greymule

Obviously Baker is out, but does the "no runners may advance" clause in 7.09 (b) still apply to Abel if he scored before the infraction?

Rule 7.09(b) has been deleted from the book, as it is the same as 6.05(h), except 6.05(h) is "The batter is out when," instead of "It is interference by a batter or a runner when." So, we are bound by 6.05(h) only now.

I believe that no matter when the run scored on the play, that the rule is quite clear: "The ball is dead and no runners may advance."

[greymule]

OK, thanks. This all makes sense. I had no trouble with immediate interference on a ground ball, and if its unintentional and costs the defense a chance at a double play, that's too bad. It was fly balls I couldn't get straight, especially with runners far off their bases.

I will take "no runners may advance" to mean that if the batter or a runner interferes with a fielder attempting to field a batted ball, then anyone not called out goes back to the base at TOP, no matter how far he had advanced before the interference.

It was an ASA case/test play that made me look to OBR for justification for sending runners back:

No outs, Abel on 3B, Baker on 2B, Charles on 1B. Daniels pops up near the 1B line and runs into F3, knocking the ball loose to prevent a double play. Abel has touched home plate prior to the collision.

The answer is:

Dead ball, Daniels is out, Baker is out, Charles is returned to 1B, Abel scores.

Yes, it's true. (I substituted names for R1, R2, etc.)