Interference?

[sodo]

THis happened in a Colt league game that is operating uner NFHS rules. Runner on first - 1 out. Batter strikes out and catcher drops the ball. Runner at first takes off towards second & batter starts to run towards first and makes contact with the loose ball - accidentially. Umpire calls dead ball on contact and orders runner back to first. I contend that it is a live ball and incedental (sp) contact as the defense put the ball in play. There were several umpires at the game and they agreed with me. Not sure if it is the right call ot not. Any thoughts?

[dash_riprock]

Are you sure? Remember - the batter is out on strikes. He has not become a runner.

[sodo]

Good point - still not sure what I would call. What would happen if the batter was just hustling out of the box to the dugout and makes contact? I guess what has me thinking is that it was all incidental. Bad part is if the batter had any baseball knowlege he would not have taken off, but in summer leagues you see it all.

I did contact an official who does state clinics and he agreed that it should have remained a live ball. Funny part was that a HS coach was in the other dugout and thought I was nuts for saying live ball until the other guys in the crowd backed me. Hate to think we were all wrong as we are all licensed.

[DG]

Colt game under NFHS, interesting, since Colt is supposed to be OBR modified.

Possibly a situation not covered, I am not aware of a case play on it. But let's look at it logically, as we would have to to rule on it. If batter can run on strike not caught then the unintentional contact is legal, live ball, defense messed up by not catching the ball. But batter can't legally run in this situation, so he has put defense at disadvantage by unintentionally making contact with the ball. If he had interfered with catcher's throw after a K, the FED umpire might legally call out the runner if he thought catcher might have a play on the runner for a strike 'em out throw 'em out situation. He might do the same in this situation, if catcher had a chance to throw the runner out before the unintential contact occured. Absent that, calling the ball dead and sending the runner back to 1B seems reasonable.

[SanDiegoSteve]

I too have never seen a Colt game with NFHS rules. How bizarre.

I have interference, as the batter was out when he made contact with the ball. I don't feel that intent has anything to do with it. Why punish the defense for doing their job properly and rewarding stupidity? Return runner to 1st.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I too have never seen a Colt game with NFHS rules. How bizarre.

I have interference, as the batter was out when he made contact with the ball. I don't feel that intent has anything to do with it. Why punish the defense for doing their job properly and rewarding stupidity? Return runner to 1st.

If you have INT, you have to get an out too, and R1 is the only one left.