Verbal Interference
 

Anybody just see A-Rod just commit (nonexistent) verbal interference in the Yankees–Blue Jays game? Almost started a fight.

First off, this is "big boy ball" not HS or LL. If "" said something to the defense (and they were dumb enough to pay attention), too bad! If "" were to come to bat again, he'd get one in his ear! It's bush-league but it's still tough ka-ka!

But in FED, this is a no-no and I believe in "small ball " too!

Technically this is not allowed in any game, including MLB.

OBR reference please?

Depends on your interpretation of "interfere or hinder".

I've never called verbal interference but have seen others call it. One I can think of a first baseman catching a fly ball in foul territory about two feet off first base. R1 screamed just as F3 was about to make the catch and as a result dropped the ball. The umpire called the batter out.

Not sure if the umpire even made the right out call in this situation but that was the call that was made.

I have no idea what A-Rod said or did, but in all rules (FED, NCAA and OBR) there's no distinction or seperate definition of "verbal" interference. OBR 2.00 defines offensive interference as " an act by the team at bat which interferes with, obstructs, impedes, hinders or confuses any fielder attempting to make a play." Obviously, an "act" can be verbal or non-verbal.

Jerry

FED explicitly includes verbal obstruction (2-22-1) as a distinct component of the definition of obstruction.

OBR does not mention verbal obstruction, and standard pro interps (J/R, MLBUM, etc.) reject verbal obstruction in most cases.

It does indeed depend on the interpretation, which is why it's important to learn the correct one.

As for screaming at a fielder, I think my ruling would depend more on the level of ball than on the interpretation of 'interference'.

. . . and standard pro interps (J/R, MLBUM, etc.) reject verbal obstruction in most cases.


MB,
They (the umpires) must not have in this instance! On the other hand, as someone pointed out, this is MLB. Any relationship to real baseball is purely coincidental.
Jerry

Here's the link to the article. Apparently A-Rod yelled, "Ha!" as he ran behind the fielder.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/31/sp...ts&oref=slogin

It's definitely verbal interference in Fed and other youth ball. But regardless of how the OBR book reads, verbal interference is not called in professional baseball. It's like the play where the runner from 2B stands in front of the ground ball to block F6's vision and then gets out of the way at the last moment. Call interference at every level except professional.

Incidentally, the announcers were soon talking about how smart a play it is for the runner, on a popup, to pass close behind the fielder and make loud footsteps.

For people who don't link to the article: the umpires did not call interference, and the Blue Jays don't claim they should have. The Jays are simply incensed at what they perceive to be a bush league action by A-Rod.

What do you mean? They did, as they are supposed to, reject verbal interference ("verbal obstruction" is a new one though).

"verbal obstruction"

Example:

Abel on 1B. Baker gets a hit to right. As Abel approaches 3B, F5 yells, "There's a snake under third base!" Baker reverses direction and returns to 2B.

I can't say I've ever seen VO called, though.

(N.B.: There is disagreement among clinicians over whether F5's comment would qualify as VO if there actually was a snake under third base.)

Verbal Obstruction:

FED Play 1 - Official Interp 3/99: When a defensive player lies and tells a runner that a passed ball was a foul ball, the fielder is guilty of verbal obstruction. - Rumble interpretation.

FED Play 2 - Official Interp 2001: Any verbal decoy, such as "I've got it,"
is obstruction. - Hopkins interpretation.

FED Play 3 - Official Interp 3/99: As the catcher throws a "pop fly" to F4 with a runner stealing, if a team member bangs bats together to simulate the sound of the batted ball, the umpire calls obstruction and ejects the offender.

In OBR there is no such thing as verbal interference or obstruction (actually points not covered). A runner is simply referred to as "gullible" for not knowing the difference between his opponent and his coach. Carl Childress said that Bruce Froemming would penalize a runner for yelling "drop it" to a fielder under 9.01(c).

This posting is getting absolutely ridiculous. What if, spectators that were given "Thunder Sticks", banged them together at the exact moment. The umpire, thinking it was someone in the bench that smacked two bats together, calls "Verbal Obstruction"!!!! vehemently, at that. (I can picture some FED umpire doing that, by the way).

Has anyone actually asked MLB why A-Rod was called on it? And what the ruling was? Oh, yeh. 9.01(c) will certainly cover it.

Jerry

If there was a snake under 3b, how would F5 know it?:D ;) :cool:

He probably had it in his hand at one time.
Jerry

For reference the Jays claim that A-Rod Yelled "Mine" , which caused the rookie third baseman to step aside thinking he was called off by the shortstop.

I still think this is nothing in OBR, but it would be a judgement call as it did CONFUSE the Defensive player. The sames as F6 telling a just stealing runner a ball was foul when it wasn't.

Why not simply penalize a runner for committing interference? Period. After all, is it not interference when a runner hinders or impedes a fielder from fielding a batted ball (in the situation at hand)? Plus, if we know that offensive interference can occur without contact, which it oftentimes does, then can't a runner intentionally yelling at a fielder and hindering said fielder from fielding be considered interference per se (forget this term of "verbal interference"--I wouldn't even use that adjective "verbal" in my explanation to the inevitably arguing coach or manager)?

...that was no snake...

Hey, hey there! Watch it. This is a family forum. :)

(forget this term of "verbal interference"--I wouldn't even use that adjective "verbal" in my explanation to the inevitably arguing coach or manager)?

It is true that the strict meaning of verbal is simply "of, in, or by means of words." Therefore, a written letter or a stone-carved saying is a verbal communication, and editors of documents that could have legal consequences are careful to distinguish between verbal and oral. In general usage, though, verbal has come to mean oral, as in, "He gave me verbal assurance."

So if we had to go to court to argue "verbal interference," then "Drop it!" might qualify, but "Blagghhh!" might not, since it's not a word. Of course, we'd have an argument if a passing runner yelled "Irregardless!" and the startled fielder dropped the ball.

But let's not ensconce "oral interference" in the rule book.

If there was a snake under 3b, how would F5 know it?

That's enough out of you!

Huh? we are talking about the offense doing something to the defense.

Huh? He wasn't.

No, but other rules and their interpretations at different levels may cover it.

...:rolleyes:

There was no call. RIF

Not calling it both ways?
 

Many of these "bush league" events are still legal today. I won't discuss rare tactics such as the defensive decoys employed by the Miami H-Canes' to win a CWS. I believe MLB fielder's are also allowed to block the runner's vision of a caught fly ball. A-Rod had an opportunity for 225 million pay "$$-backs" and the defense complains because it worked. My only question after this broo-ha-ha is whether the rules will be changed to prevent the runner from yelling "mine" in the future?

You might want to change this belief.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/01/sp...tml?ref=sports

Link to an article this morning about the A-Rod incident.

Indeed. There will always be little ploys done by players--it's what makes the game more interesting and kinda fun, IMHO--but certain things are still illegal. ;)

A-Rod very bush league.