The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 29, 2006, 09:35am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 362
Quote:
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.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 29, 2006, 10:05am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Posts: 3,100
I can see where being grazed by a throw that is caught might not be interference if the ball isn't substantively deflected and F3 catches it anyway. But how about this one?:

No outs, Abel on 3B off on a suicide squeeze. Baker bunts 20 feet down the 1B line. Abel scores. F2 picks up the ball and fires to 1B. Baker is running in fair territory, and the ball hits him squarely in the back. But as Baker was leaning forward while running, the ball continues upward over him and is caught by F3 for the out. I think you have to call interference. Now if you do, or if the ball is not caught, do you send Abel back to 3B?

It's true that if, with a runner stealing, the batter appears to interfere with F2 but the runner is out anyway, the interference is considered not to have happened. But applying that theory to batted balls, even a fly ball that is caught, could be problematic.

Abel on 1B is running on the pitch. Baker hits a bloop that F4 charges, moving toward 2B. Abel collides unintentionally with F4, knocks him down, and starts to return to 1B. F4, on the ground, catches the ball anyway. F4, from his disadvantaged position on the ground, fires toward 1B but throws the ball away.

Better that you called immediate interference and killed the play, even if the call appeared to reward the offense.
__________________
greymule
More whiskey—and fresh horses for my men!
Roll Tide!
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 29, 2006, 10:10am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 362
greymule,

I think the rule of thumb that the rulesofbaseball.com is implying is "Did interference really happen? What it successful?" If the interference didn't affect what the defense was attempting(in most cases would be an out) then no interference actually took place.

So in your two cases, neither should be called interference because in both cases outs were called on the play. So in your first case Abel scores on the bunt and in the second case place Abel on third base.

Last edited by tibear; Wed Nov 29, 2006 at 10:12am.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 29, 2006, 10:28am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: York County, Maine
Posts: 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by tibear
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.
Tibear. you're talking something completely different. you said that the runner was running illegally to 1B but don't say what he was doing that was wrong. I will assume he was out of the running lane. If that is case then the determining factor would be the fielder catching the ball so no interference, plus on a thrown ball the umpire would have to judge that the runner did something intentional to interefere with the thrown ball.

This sitch is different from interfering with a fielder fileding a batted ball.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 29, 2006, 11:42am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Newburgh NY
Posts: 1,822
Quote:
I recognize what your saying. However, if you look at the play, did interference really occur.

Either the Runner interfered or he didn't. That's the JUDGEMENT part of the interference rule. If in your judgement there was no interference then whatever happend on the play stands. However, do not wait until after the play to make your determination. once we JUDGE that there was interference as mentioned we penalize RIGHT AWAY.



Quote:
The BR attempted to interfere with F3 but was unsuccessful because F3 still made the catch, so in fact there was no interference.
Again you are missing the point. We do not wait until AFTERWARDS when Interference occurs. Interference is NOT Obstruction. Under Type "B" OBS we wait until playing action ends and then make the awards IF ANY that the runner would have had absent the OBS. Not so when ruling Interference.

Read Rule 2.00 Definitions. Interference is an IMMEDIATE dead ball. With some exceptions (as in B1 interfering with F2 and the runner was retired), what happens AFTER the Interference is Moot. As mentioned as soon as an umpire judges Interference the call is

1. TIME
2. That's Interference
3. Somebody is out (and maybe 2 are out)

Pete Booth
__________________
Peter M. Booth
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Runner interference versus umpire interference Jay R Baseball 1 Thu Apr 28, 2005 07:00pm
interference??? slowballbaker Softball 13 Fri Apr 15, 2005 09:37pm
Interference WinterWillie Softball 6 Tue Aug 03, 2004 12:13pm
Interference WinterWillie Softball 3 Sat Jul 17, 2004 12:27pm
Interference Larry Softball 5 Thu Jun 06, 2002 09:31am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:06am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1