Cubs-Sox play

[SanDiegoSteve]

I saw it live and on replay...in my opinion it was a place for a no-call. U2 had a no-call until the defense squawked. They had him ask for help from U1, who emphatically called interference. I think it was a bad call. It looked to me like the runner was trying to go around the fielder as he made his original play on the batted ball. After F4 booted the hell out of it and knocked it into the grass part of the infield, where R1 had already ran to avoid him, he took at least a couple of big steps in chasing after the ball. It was not even close to being "a step and a reach."

I would have said that I had nothing and gave an emphatic safe signal. It may have even been obstruction, but I would not have called it. Train wreck all the way.

[JJ]

The more I thought about it the more I thought it should be obstruction. F4 booted it and though he did keep it in front of him, he had to go from the dirt to the grass to go after it. It looked like the runner was trying to avoid a collision - which did happen in the grass.
I couldn't look at this "wreck" and have a no-call. I was surprised there wasn't more of a squawk and even and ejection - but it IS Spring Training...

I do wish someone had it on film. Great item for discussion!

JJ

[GarthB]

I predict that the answer will be that the ball did not pass the fielder and did not "deflect" off the fielder...he was still in the act of fielding the batted ball and thus protected.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by GarthB

I predict that the answer will be that the ball did not pass the fielder and did not "deflect" off the fielder...he was still in the act of fielding the batted ball and thus protected.

What do you call a ball that ricochets off of a fielder's glove and chest and bounces 10 feet away, if not a "deflection?"

[SAump]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

What do you call a ball that ricochets off of a fielder's glove and chest and bounces 10 feet away, if not a "deflection?"

Error

[JJ]

Originally Posted by SAump

Error

....followed by....OBSTRUCTION.

JJ

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

What do you call a ball that ricochets off of a fielder's glove and chest and bounces 10 feet away, if not a "deflection?"

I'm assuming for now that the answer will be that as long as it stayed in front of the fielder it will be ruled that he is still in the act of fielding the ball, as opposed to deflecting off his glove and going a distance to his side or behind him.

Please remember, that I prefaced my post above by stating that I am merely trying to predict what the interpretation will be when we hear about it from MLB. Don't shoot the messenger.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by GarthB

I'm assuming for now that the answer will be that as long as it stayed in front of the fielder it will be ruled that he is still in the act of fielding the ball, as opposed to deflecting off his glove and going a distance to his side or behind him.

Please remember, that I prefaced my post above by stating that I am merely trying to predict what the interpretation will be when we hear about it from MLB. Don't shoot the messenger.

This is what I said in post #3. Given that it's a spring training game, the discussion among MLB umps might well remain internal, especially if the umpiring supervisors decide that the call should have been OBS and not INT.

I've been thinking about how I would have ruled on the play if it happened in a HS game I was working. I think it's probably HTBT: I do like the "step and a reach" concept, (although I realize that it was not conceived for this kind of incident): if the fielding attempt doesn't cause the fielder to move much, I'm likely to rule INT. But if he has to come up 8 feet or more onto the grass to field the ball, even if right in front of him, I'd be leaning toward OBS.

[johnnyg08]

In a play like this...without seeing it...I have a hard time rewarding the defense with an INT call here for booting a ground ball...could it happen? sure. but the fielder better have controlled the ball within the near vicinity of his fielding space.

[DonInKansas]

Originally Posted by JJ

I was surprised there wasn't more of a squawk and even and ejection - but it IS Spring Training...

Yeah? Tell that to the Yankees and Devil Rays....

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by DonInKansas

Yeah? Tell that to the Yankees and Devil Rays....

You can drop the "Devil" from the Tampa name now. They are officially now only the the Tampa Bay Rays. I believe it has something to do with Sun Rays. Not sure how that equates since they play in a domed stadium.

[UMP25]

John,

Back in the days--has it really been 19 years ago?--when I went to umpire school, Mssrs. Jaksa and Roder were our rules instructors. As they explained then, when a ball is deflected by a fielder and contact between said fielder and a runner occurs...

...if the fielder deflects or bobbles the ball but in such a way that he maintains the ball on his person or right near him, we have interference on the runner. This was labeled "maintain deflects."

...if the fielder deflects the ball in such a way that he just has to take a step or two to retrieve it, we have no interference or obstruction (so-called incidental contact). This was labeled "step deflects."

...if the fielder deflects the ball in such a way that he has to run or chase after it to retrieve it, we have obstruction on the fielder. This was called "chase deflects."

Rather unusual terminology, but it helped us to better understand when interference or obstruction--or nothing--occurred.

[mbyron]

I agree the terminology is unusual, but I agree with the philosophy behind it. I'm intrigued by the idea of a fielder "step deflecting" a batted ball, so that contact would be incidental, neither INT nor OBS. The fielder's protection is ruled to be over -- so no INT -- but he hasn't moved enough from his location where he WAS protected to warrant the OBS call. Neat.

[greymule]

Hey, then I called that play correctly years ago. It was definitely "step deflects"—in between "maintain deflects" and "chase deflects." Makes sense, too.

I can sleep easier now.