intervening play
 

i read about the intervening play in the PBUC manual and the jaksa/roder manual.

PBUC :
INTERFERENCE WITH INTERVENING PLAY:

Play: Play at the plate on runner attempting to score; runner is called safe.
A following play is made on the batter runner, and he is called out for interference outside the three foot lane.

Ruling: With less than two out, the run scores and batter runner is out. With two out, the run does not count. The reasoning is that an intervening play occurred before the interference. Runners would return to base last legally touched at time of interference. However, with two out, the runner reached home on a play in which the batter runner was out before he reached first base.

jaksa/roder says :
Bases loaded, no outs. A pitch is batted softly toward the mound, fielded by the pitcher, and thrown badly to the catcher. The catcher, pulled off home plate by the throw, is unable to tag home before throwing to first against the B R. The throw strikes the B R, who is outside the 45 foot running lane and not yet to first base, in the back: the B R is out for his interference, R2 and R1 must return to their TOP base, R3, because of the play against him (an actual throw in an attempt to retire him), is allowed to score.

what is correct ? other runners back to TOP or TOI base ?

and is the intervening play only considered if it is at home plate ? or does it effect the interference rule at any base ?


and here's something even more strange :
" Normally, when a batter-runner makes the third out before reaching first base, no run can score. A routine ground ball to the infield or a squeeze play where no play is made at the plate are good examples. Bur the exception to the rule is when an intervening play takes place.

Let's say the Cardinals have the bases loaded with two outs when J.D. Drew taps to Cubs' pitcher Jon Lieber who throws home for an inning-ending force but Jim Edmonds, the runner on third, is called safe at home. Cubs' catcher Joe Girardi then throws to first to retire Drew for the third out. In the process, the ball hits Drew who is called out for running outside the runner's box the last 45 feet. In this case, Edmonds' run would count even though the batter-runner (Drew) made the third out before reaching first base.

Since the throw home to retire Edmonds was an intervening play and he was safe before Drew was ruled out, Edmonds' run counts. It's an unusual example of "time play" but another aspect of the rule that umpires must deal with."
the run does count, despite the BR beeing out by interference before he reaches 1stbase ????

Bruno,

Regardless of an intervening play or not, if the BR makes the 3rd out of the half inning before reaching 1B, no run will score on the play if I'm the umpire.

Read it more carefully - that's what both J/R and th MLBUM say as well.

My understanding is that when interference is preceded by an intervening play, runners are generally returned to the base attained at TOI.

JM

what i wanted to say is, that J/R and PBUC are different.
if the runners have already reached their advanced base before the interference with an intervening play, J/R sends them back to their TOP base. PBUC sends them to their TOI base !

I looked in my J/R briefly, but I don't see those plays. I'll try again when I have the time.

But those plays don't make any sense, unless INT is different from every other kind of out, and actually gives the offense an advantage.

Abel on 3B, 2 outs. Baker hits a one-hopper back to F1. F1 foolishly throws home in an attempt to get Abel, who slides across the plate safe. Then F2 throws to F3 in time to get Baker. Everybody knows Abel's run doesn't score.

Same situation, except that F2's throw hits Baker running outside the lane. Now the run scores?

Something's wrong here.

J/R clearly says TOP in my 2004 version.

MLBUM and PBUC say TOI. Evans says professional interpretation supersedes the rulebook comment that "in the event the batter-runner has not reached first base, all runners shall return to the base last occupied at the time of the pitch", in the case of an intervening play.

So, I agree that J/R (2004 version) and MLBUM/PBUC/Evans are in conflict and I think it best to go with the more logical interpretation of TOI. In this case, with 2 outs BR who interfered with the catch before reaching 1B is out and no runs score. With less than 2 outs BR is out, runner from 3rd scores and any other runners return to base at TOI.

That's quite logical, DG. My problem is with that last play Bruno cited, where the run scores even though the BR is the third out for INT before reaching 1B, as if it's a time play. Is that in the J/R?

If he third out is made by the BR at first base, no run can score. Both J/R as well as MLBUM echo each other on this. Think about it for a sec. No run may score when the BR makes the third out while advancing to first base.

Also, if the interference is made BEFORE first base, it would be a TOP placement. If the BR is PAST first base it is TOI. You can find both in J/R under section IV, p108-109

I agree 100%. I just want to know where Bruno's Cardinals-Cubs play and its subsequent ruling came from.

Bruno?

A Google search reveals that the play comes from an article in Baseball Digest in 2000. I would say that the play is simply wrong.

WIth respect to TOI versus TOP, J/R is in the minority, and while I greatly appreciate their book, the MLBUM trumps their opinion. I will note that the J/R opinion is in accord with the printed rules (comment following the definition of interference), which make no exception to the general principle that runners return to TOP if B/R hasn't reached first base at the time of interference. The MLBUM/PBUC/Evans interps make an exception in the case of an intervening play. So I suspect that at one time the two schools of umpiring thought differed on the interp.

That doesn't matter now; clearly the ruling is TOI when there has been an intervening play.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...59/ai_64150846

STOP !! Rich Marazzi corrected himself and said that the run would score only with less then 2 outs, so forget about this (found that article a couple of minutes ago). :)

so back to intervening play. intervening play ONLY at homeplate or any other base ? what about 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, can R2 stay on 3rd or has he go back to 2ndbase ?

He can stay on third.

And, my guess is that JR just "misspoke" when using TOP in the example you quoted -- that is, R1 and R2 hadn't advanced to the next base in his mind's eye, so TOP and TOI give the same result.

Rich Marazzi! I exchanged letters with him 30 years ago. Still have his book around somewhere.

I'd probably find myself hard-pressed to call INT on the B/R if the intervening play was anywhere other than home. A throw from the vicinity of 3rd or 2nd is quite unlikely to result in a quality throw with which the B/R interferes with F3's ability to glove.

I have never read a source of rule interp that would rule running lane interference on a throw from anywhere except from around the plate area. So you should yourself impossibly hard pressed to make the INT unless the throw comes from around the plate area. Can't rule out F5, but it would more likely be F1 or F2 that makes the throw from around the plate area.

See the 2006 BRD Item 273. Official Interpretation 186-273 by Fitzpatrick PBUC: "(c) The throw need not come from behind."