Mariners-Angels DTS kicked by BR

[whitecane]

I saw it with my own eyes tonight at Safeco. Dropped third strike, muffed by Angel's catcher Mathis, off his chest down the first baseline into (BR) Adrian Beltre's feet as he's running to first. No way did Beltre intentionally kick the ball as he didn't even see it coming. The ball bounces wide, Mathis picks it up and wings it into right field. As Beltre is rounding 2nd headed for 3rd, PU (Kerwin Danley) is signaling "OUT" which ends up being the call. Is it the correct one?

I thought without intent on the BR's part, this play was a "nothing". Am I misremembering?

[greymule]

Ball deflected into the runner's feet? Not interference under OBR. Would have to be a running lane violation (or a blown call).

[UmpLarryJohnson]

running lane vio, gotta be

[tcarilli]

Did he kick it or not? It is unclear from your post. If a ball is kicked, it is deemed intentional and therefore interference.

[soundedlikeastrike]

I thought it was a blown call.

When the ball squirted out off the catcher, it landed somewhat behind Beltre, and as he looked around and kinda started running he actually hooked the ball and drug it along with his foot, then kinda paused, like he thought he was out.

HP umpire gave the out sign before the throw, so he was called out for kicking the ball.

IMO it looked intentional but wasn't.

Another blue costs us, er, ah, I mean the M's the game. This was the spark that was gonna lead to a 7 run inning ;')...

[UmpLarryJohnson]

Originally Posted by soundedlikeastrike

IMO it looked intentional but wasn't.

what makes YOUR openion better than Mr Danleys' ??

[tcarilli]

Originally Posted by soundedlikeastrike

IMO it looked intentional but wasn't.

The beauty of this is that your opinion doesn't matter--if the batter kicks the ball it is deemed intentional.

[Tim C]

More importantly:

KD worked the first five innings with his pants unzipped.

Talk about an "equipment malfunction."

Regards,

[UmpLarryJohnson]

Originally Posted by tcarilli

if the batter kicks the ball it is deemed intentional.

is this a official interpratation?? im not bein sarcastic id like to know.

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by UmpLarryJohnson

is this a official interpratation?? im not bein sarcastic id like to know.

Yes it is interference and you can find it in the Smitty 101 Rulebook!

And I am being sarcastic!

[UmpLarryJohnson]

i see this: "If, in the judgment of the umpire, the runner deliberately and intentionally kicks such a batted ball on which the infielder has missed a play, then the runner shall be called out for interference."

but thats not the answer---theres sucha thing asa unintentional kick. i dont have the ozzyinterp 2007 Edition so sorry bout that!

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by soundedlikeastrike

I thought it was a blown call.

When the ball squirted out off the catcher, it landed somewhat behind Beltre, and as he looked around and kinda started running he actually hooked the ball and drug it along with his foot, then kinda paused, like he thought he was out.

HP umpire gave the out sign before the throw, so he was called out for kicking the ball.

IMO it looked intentional but wasn't.

Another blue costs us, er, ah, I mean the M's the game. This was the spark that was gonna lead to a 7 run inning ;')...

My confirmation that this was a correct call was your statement that it was a blown call ... but that's for another time.

The OP said that the ball deflected into the batter immediately ... which would be nothing. The recent claim that the ball was at rest when it was contacted by the batter is a COMPLETELY different story - and IS interference.

[DG]

Originally Posted by UmpLarryJohnson

running lane vio, gotta be

Not on a DTS. Unless it was kicked intentional it's nothing.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by DG

Not on a DTS. Unless it was kicked intentional it's nothing.

You can have a running lane violation on a DTS.

And either Evans or Roder, iirc, intones that a BR kicking the ball on a DTS is enought to call the out. I think the theory is that they are skileld enough athletes to avoid the ball if they want to, so the fact that they didn't is all the evidence that's needed.

[fitump56]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

You can have a running lane violation on a DTS.

And either Evans or Roder, iirc, intones that a BR kicking the ball on a DTS is enought to call the out. I think the theory is that they are skileld enough athletes to avoid the ball if they want to, so the fact that they didn't is all the evidence that's needed.

Correct on all counts.