How can you get sarcasm out of what I said? It is very possible that the umpires wanted to stay on Jeter's good side. That's just the way it is in Yankeeland.

Why would a professional umpire risk damaging his reputation to stay on a player's good side?

It baffles me as much as it baffles you, but that is about the only explanation I can think of, other than really bad judgment.

If what you had said was sarcastic, it would have been rather clever.

Yes, and that means that my original observation was correct. He was serious! YGTBSM!!!

Walt, just keep on calling them the way they are, buddy!

Computer problems kept me from signing on yesterday or I would have posted earlier. KC Royals fan here (yes, there are a couple of us left!) and was watching the game and this play. Jeter swung and missed, his follow-through went all the way around and ended with the bat head in the dirt down by his feet, at an angle to his hands and in front of the catcher's left foot. Buck, the catcher, comes out throwing (poorly as he has done most of the season) and his left foot hits the bat (which isn't in motion as the follow-through is done). Doesn't really impact his throw, but the PU immediately pointed down at the interference. Called time after Damon was safe at 2nd and walked out and made the award, no discussion with anyone else on the crew.

At first glance, I couldn't figure out why Jeter stayed at the plate and Damon went back, but as pointed out earlier, J/R cites an example almost identical to this and the award matches what was enforced at the game.

If that's the only explanation you can think of, you still have a long way to go to understand baseball, and umpiring.

The call was correct, the rule is legit and there was, as usual, no favortism shown.

Shhh let's pretend it was sarcasm.;)

Okeedokee ! :)