hi,
i send an e-mail to rick roder and that is what he answered :

I was unaware of this discrepancy and thank you for pointing it out. I never realized that MLB and PBUC extended the exception given R3 to other runners as well. I emailed a couple “high ups” who also disagree that it should extend to other runners. But due to all that is involved in getting anything changed in MLB, the ruling stands for now. I will change the Jaksa/Roder manual to reflect this. You should follow the MLB and PBUC interpretations.

Thanks again,
Rick

so, runners go back to TOI base.
later i asked him about my example with the R2 beating the throw to F5 at 3rdbase and a later BR interference.

he answered this :
The rule provides only for a run being scored (in fact, the rationale for the rule is the “finality” of a run scoring). So it does not apply at any other base.

Have a Merry Christmas,
Rick


as far is i undestand, he would send R2 back to 2ndbase and let other runners only stay on their TOI base (if it is beyond their TOP base), if "the intervening play" is at home plate.
or is there still something that i miss ? :-)

This is the first I've heard of finality with regard to placing runners. If with less than 2 out an intervening play creates a TOI situation, fine, but I can't see why TOI would then apply only to a runner from 3B and not to other runners.

[Interesting conflict in BRD 273 about whether the base is a safe haven, with Fitzpatrick and Demuth on one side and J/R on the other.]

i still don't get this intervening play thing.
we have R3 and R1, 0 outs.
F6 fields the groundball and goes for the force to F4 at 2nd but R1 beats the throw. now R3 steps on homeplate. R1 now intentionally slaps F4 on his throwing hand, so he cannot complete the throw to F3. we call R1 out for the interference, put BR on 1st and send R3 back to 3rdbase. so far so good.

why isn't the try to force R1 at 2nd not considered an intervening play ? i mean, the play was to force him,they didnt make it, and the throw to 1st was the following play. is it because the player they made a play on (intervening play), made the interference ?

why isn't the try to force R1 at 2nd not considered an intervening play ?

Because is not a play against the runner from 3B.

J/R [2002]: 13.IV.B.2

If a BR has not yet touched or passed 1B at TOI, all runners not out must return to their TOP base, with the following exceptions:

. . . If a runner from 3B has acquired home plate despite a play against him, and then INT occurs by the BR before he reaches 1B, the run is allowed to score, unless the INT was the third out. This is called the "intervening play."

So while the play at 2B in your situation is a sort of generic intervening play, it doesn't meet the above criteria. And the exception does apply only to a runner from 3B, no others.

One.....

singular sensation?

One is enough if it comes from the right palce.

Thrilling combination?

Just got up the energy to look in Evans, which does say that the intervening play has to be at home plate.

that means, R2, 0 outs. F6 fields the ball and throws to F5 but the tag on R2 is late. F5 now fires to F3 but BR interferes by running inside the diamond. since the intervening play was not at homeplate R2 has go back to 2ndbase ?

that means, R2, 0 outs. F6 fields the ball and throws to F5 but the tag on R2 is late. F5 now fires to F3 but BR interferes by running inside the diamond. since the intervening play was not at homeplate R2 has go back to 2ndbase ?

Yes, according to Evans, under the definition of offensive interference. After presenting the intervening play at home and noting that the rule does score with subsequent BR INT (less than 2 out, of course), Evans says:

"A different ruling shall prevail if no play occurs at home plate prior to the batter runner's interference. In this case, the Note explaining offensive interference is valid, and all runners return to the bases last occupied at the time of the pitch."

[Bolding is mine.]

Do you consider this one..the right place?