interference ignored??

[newump]

R1, R3, one out with a 1-1 count on the batter. R1 attempts to steal second. As the catcher starts his throwing motion, B1 interferes. The umpire points and says, "that's interference." The throw is in time to retire R1, but R3 scores in the meantime.

i know that with R3 only trying to steal home and less than 2 out - R3 is out.

and with R1 only thrown out trying to steal we ignore the interference, but what is the ruling in the above scenerio?? any differences between codes??
thanks,

[UmpJM]

newump,

Since the catcher's initial throw was successful in retiring the runner he was attempting to play on, the interference is disregarded and the R3's score stands.

JM

[Tim C]

Actually "newump" the interference is not ignored.

"IF" an out is made there simply was no interference.


Regards,

[UMP25]

Originally Posted by newump

R1, R3, one out with a 1-1 count on the batter. R1 attempts to steal second. As the catcher starts his throwing motion, B1 interferes. The umpire points and says, "that's interference." The throw is in time to retire R1, but R3 scores in the meantime.

i know that with R3 only trying to steal home and less than 2 out - R3 is out.

Huh?

If R3 is stealing home and the catcher throws to second but is interfered with by B1 and R1 never stole, you're calling R3 out? Maybe I'm missing something here, but R3 isn't called out in such a situation.

[UmpJM]

Ump25,

I believe the intent of the part of newump's post that you highlighted in red is that the R3 was the only runner. In which case, his interpretation is correct.

JM

[UMP25]

My confusion may have been a result of the way he worded it then.

[newump]

umpjm was correct about R3 only. thx for your help.