Obstruction/interference on batted ball

[bwbuddy]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

As always, contacting the fielder is different from contacting the ball.

So then, what if the runner had instead contacted the ball if F4 had a chance to make the play?

[UmpJM]

bwbuddy,

Presuming the umpire judged the contact unintentional, that's "nothing". Live ball, play the bounce.

JM

[bwbuddy]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

bwbuddy,

Presuming the umpire judged the contact unintentional, that's "nothing". Live ball, play the bounce.

JM

So, since the pitcher touched the ball, even if F4 still had a good chance to make a play, the runner can unintentionally contact the ball with no penalty?

[UmpJM]

bwbuddy,

That is correct. Below is the discussion from the MLBUM.

6.4 BATTED BALL STRIKING THE RUNNER

The concept of the runner being in jeopardy after the ball goes past an infielder and strikes the runner in a situation where another infielder still has a chance to make a play on the ball applies ONLY when the ball PASSES the first infielder without being touched or deflected by him. This concept DOES NOT APPLY if the ball is touched or deflected by the first infielder, even though another infielder has a chance to make a play on the ball.

In other words, after a ball has been touched (deflected) by any infielder (including the pitcher), if the ball then strikes a runner (unintentionally on the part of the runner), the ball is alive and in play even if another infielder may be in position to field the ball. (See Official Baseball Rules 5.09(f) and 7.09(m).)

The reasoning for the above concept is that a runner cannot be expected to avoid a deflected ball while running and should not, therefore, be in jeopardy of being called out for being struck by such a deflected ball. Of course, a runner may still be guilty of intentional interference even after an infielder deflects the ball if the runner deliberately deflects the ball or allows it to strike him when he could have reasonably avoided it. The fact that the ball has been deflected by an infielder should not be taken as a license for a runner to interfere intentionally. (See Official Baseball Rules 7.09(g) and (h).)

JM

[charliej47]

About the same situation under FED where the fielder ran in front of F4 and got hit by a deflected fly ball. I ruled the runner out because the ball was playable and was still considered a "fly" ball.

Another game under FED where the ball hit BU in the "C" spot and was deflected toward F5. The runner ran in front of F5 and was hit by the ball.


In both of these games I rules outs.

[DG]

Originally Posted by charliej47

About the same situation under FED where the fielder ran in front of F4 and got hit by a deflected fly ball. I ruled the runner out because the ball was playable and was still considered a "fly" ball.

Another game under FED where the ball hit BU in the "C" spot and was deflected toward F5. The runner ran in front of F5 and was hit by the ball.


In both of these games I rules outs.

Ball is dead if it hits BU in the C. No outs.

According to JM's reference the deflected fly ball contact is not an out either.

[UmpJM]

charliej47,

Why don't you try reading the cite I posted a little more slowly and see if you can understand it.

Then, go read the Rule 2.0 definition of "Umpire Interference" ( (c)(2) ), Rule 5.09(f) (and don't skip the "comment"!), and 6.08(d). Think how they might all be combined to make a proper ruling on the 2nd sitch you describe.

Then, come back here and post why both of the calls you described are 100% wrong.

JM