Had to dump 3...or did I?

[Tim C]

I want to be very careful here as all I can really do is read your words, make a mental picture in my mind and rule as I "think" I would do on the field.

"IMO, I treated it and saw it as a play at 1st base."

This is the first "problem." The play must be consiuder the same as a play at second or third in a force play situation.

"Ran through the plate."

At the plate this is the only thing he cannot do.

As BigUmp has noted he must slide or avoid . . . the instant he did not he is open for a FPSR violation.

The plate is even a little different that even 2nd and 3rd. With the plate flat to the ground the runner still cannot slide past the "base."

What really matters in your play is when the contact occurred . . . if it was in front of the plate (base) rather than at or past the plate (base) then you could have nuttin' -- HOWEVER -- if the contact occurred at the pate or past the plate and there was no attempt to avoid it would be FPSR>

From what you have posted -- an in my ivory tower -- I think you missed a Force Play Slide Rule violation.

BTW, speaking to your title of the thread . . . you would have still had the ejections . . . it just would have been players and rats from the offensive team.

Regards,

[Tommy P]

Originally Posted by Tim C

I want to be very careful here as all I can really do is read your words, make a mental picture in my mind and rule as I "think" I would do on the field.

"IMO, I treated it and saw it as a play at 1st base."

This is the first "problem." The play must be consiuder the same as a play at second or third in a force play situation.

"Ran through the plate."

At the plate this is the only thing he cannot do.

As BigUmp has noted he must slide or avoid . . . the instant he did not he is open for a FPSR violation.

The plate is even a little different that even 2nd and 3rd. With the plate flat to the ground the runner still cannot slide past the "base."

What really matters in your play is when the contact occurred . . . if it was in front of the plate (base) rather than at or past the plate (base) then you could have nuttin' -- HOWEVER -- if the contact occurred at the pate or past the plate and there was no attempt to avoid it would be FPSR>

From what you have posted -- an in my ivory tower -- I think you missed a Force Play Slide Rule violation.

BTW, speaking to your title of the thread . . . you would have still had the ejections . . . it just would have been players and rats from the offensive team.

Regards,

The contact was approx. 3-4 ft. on the 3rd base side of home plate.

Sorry, I tried to paint a mental picture. Let me try one more time.

As the catcher stretched for the throw, he held his foot on the plate after a slight bobble, pulling him up the line. As he came up, his pivot foot was straddling the line. As he went to throw to 1st, his pivot foot came up and R3ran into it spinning the catcher around with no throw.

I must admit, if the throw was made and was errant, I would have made the same call. I think

Thanks all for your input!

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by Tommy P

The contact was approx. 3-4 ft. on the 3rd base side of home plate.

Sorry, I tried to paint a mental picture. Let me try one more time.

As the catcher stretched for the throw, he held his foot on the plate after a slight bobble, pulling him up the line. As he came up, his pivot foot was straddling the line. As he went to throw to 1st, his pivot foot came up and R3ran into it spinning the catcher around with no throw.

I must admit, if the throw was made and was errant, I would have made the same call. I think

Thanks all for your input!

The runner cannot go in standing up and make contact. It doesn't matter where the catcher's pivot foot was.

[UmpLarryJohnson]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

The runner cannot go in standing up and make contact. It doesn't matter where the catcher's pivot foot was.

he ASKED for opinions but looks like his MIND was already SET

Originally Posted by Tommy P

The contact was approx. 3-4 ft. on the 3rd base side of home plate.

Sorry, I tried to paint a mental picture. Let me try one more time.

As the catcher stretched for the throw, he held his foot on the plate after a slight bobble, pulling him up the line. As he came up, his pivot foot was straddling the line. As he went to throw to 1st, his pivot foot came up and R3ran into it spinning the catcher around with no throw.

I must admit, if the throw was made and was errant, I would have made the same call. I think

Thanks all for your input!

Okay, here is the problem based on how I am picturing the play.

The runner MUST either slide, or, move AWAY from the fielder in the force play slide rule, otherwise he is interfering with the player making the play.

In this case, had the runner slid, and made the contact before the base IN THE BASE PATH or on the base, the contact would be legal. If the contact was on either side or beyond the bag, it is interference. If he didn't slide, it doesn't matter WHERE he or the fielder is, if he makes contact, he has interfered with the play and he, and the next runner is out.

It is as simple as that really.

[Steven Tyler]

Instead of the next runner being out, shouldn't that be the batter/runner being ruled out on the interference?

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

Instead of the next runner being out, shouldn't that be the batter/runner being ruled out on the interference?

Technically, it is whoever the next play was going to be made on. In this case, it appears it would be the batter/runner.

Sorry. My initial post is worded sort of funky.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by rei

Technically, it is whoever the next play was going to be made on. In this case, it appears it would be the batter/runner.

Sorry. My initial post is worded sort of funky.

If it was the FED FPSR, it's always the BR who is the second out; other runners return.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

If it was the FED FPSR, it's always the BR who is the second out; other runners return.

My rule book is buried somewhere in my work van, so I could not look up the rule.

BUT.........I found my 2007 casebook. Page 78 concerning rule 8.4.2, there is a "Comment":

The umpire has the authority to declare two runners out when a runner or retired runner illegally interferes and prevents a double play In such circumstances, the runner who interferes is out and the other runner involved is also out. Also, when the batter-runner interfers, the umpire may declare two outs. The batter-runner is declared out and so is the runner who has advanced the nearest to home plate.

Somehow, I think that if it is a home to third double play attempt, and the runner coming into home interferes, I would be calling the runner going into 3rd out too.

If you can quote the rule to support your comment, I will gladly change my mind on this.