Interference or Obstruction?

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by rookieblue

Hi, Josh,

Don't know if you were thinking of Jaksa/Roder, but it says: (2004 ed. at 98, italics in original)

I agree, it's hard to tell from the original post if F3 was attempting to field the ball at the time of contact, or was essentially heeding F2's call to let it roll foul. Might be interference, might be nuttin'. This statement would seem to indicate the former.

I'm leaning towards interference, since it reads like F3 was still crouched to field an approaching batted ball, and only decided (was forced?) to let it roll to a stop after contact.

Cheers,

Bob James

Actually I wasn't thinking of the J/R but that's only because I don't have on Yet something I need to purchase soon. I believe it was one of Jim Evans books that I say that situation in.

The OP didn't exactly specify if the fielder had an opportunity to field the ball prior to the contact; Therefore, I didn't specify what I would call in this circumstance. It seems to be a HTBT type of play.

-Josh

[Ump29]

From what I read in the OP this is interference but I would have to actually be there to see if there was an attempt to field. In actual fact this could occur quite fast with an attempt/no attempt opinion by the umpire as the runner
contacted the fielder. Would have to be there !!

[umpjong]

The first baseman had just arrived at the ball as the contact was made. (I really think the catchers yelling to the first baseman might have influenced the umpires.) The first baseman had not given up his attempt at fielding the ball. It was only after the contact that he let the ball stop. Sorry for the confusion...