Double Play or Not?

[mmtech]

Runner at 2nd, 1 out. Pop-up over 2nd base. Runner stays on base. Shortstop running to make the catch runs into the runner knocking him off the base. Shortstop catches the pop-up and tags the runner who is off the base. Double play or not?

[johnnyg08]

How about interference or not? :-) R2 out, B/R to 1B

[jicecone]

A runner on base can not intefer with a fielder attempting to make a play.

Rule 7.08(b) Comment: A runner who is adjudged to have hindered a fielder who is attempting to make a play on a batted ball is out whether it was intentional or not.
If, however, the runner has contact with a legally occupied base when he hinders the fielder, he shall not be called out unless, in the umpire’s judgment, such hindrance, whether it occurs on fair or foul territory, is intentional. If the umpire declares the hindrance intentional, the following penalty shall apply: With less than two out, the umpire shall declare both the runner and batter out. With two out, the umpire shall declare the batter out.

[mbyron]

7.08(b) is the correct rule. Doesn't sound like intentional INT, so I've got BR out on the catch, live ball, play on. If the runner is tagged off the base, that's 2 outs.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by mbyron

7.08(b) is the correct rule. Doesn't sound like intentional INT, so I've got BR out on the catch, live ball, play on. If the runner is tagged off the base, that's 2 outs.

If the shortstop ran R2 over and knocked him off the base, how does this make him out if he's tagged? I'll give F6 the catch, but I'm putting R2, who was under no obligation to move out of the way, back on 2nd base. No double play. No soup for you!

[jicecone]

HTBT situation. If there was no intent on anyone then I have two outs. Intent on runner, two outs.

However, if the F6 forceably moved runner off base, then we have something else.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by jicecone

HTBT situation. If there was no intent on anyone then I have two outs. Intent on runner, two outs.

However, if the F6 forceably moved runner off base, then we have something else.

I am basing my answer on this statement:

Originally Posted by mmtech

Shortstop running to make the catch runs into the runner knocking him off the base.

Sounds liked he was pretty well forced off the base to me. That base belongs to R2, and barring any intentional interference, he doesn't have to move off the base.

[PeteBooth]

Steve did you watch the 1991 World Series?

The Kent Hrbek vs. Ron Gant situation from the 1991 World Series,

the umpire ruled Gant out because he judged that Gant's momentum--not Hrbek's wrestling move--caused Gant to lose contact with the base.

Pete Booth

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

Steve did you watch the 1991 World Series?

The Kent Hrbek vs. Ron Gant situation from the 1991 World Series,

the umpire ruled Gant out because he judged that Gant's momentum--not Hrbek's wrestling move--caused Gant to lose contact with the base.

Pete Booth

Yes, I saw it. Gant was moving prior to Hrbek's move. The runner in the OP was stationary. No momentum.

[bossman72]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

If the shortstop ran R2 over and knocked him off the base, how does this make him out if he's tagged? I'll give F6 the catch, but I'm putting R2, who was under no obligation to move out of the way, back on 2nd base. No double play. No soup for you!

I'm with you on this one, Steve-O

[JR12]

Originally Posted by bossman72

I'm with you on this one, Steve-O

Me too!

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

If the shortstop ran R2 over and knocked him off the base, how does this make him out if he's tagged? I'll give F6 the catch, but I'm putting R2, who was under no obligation to move out of the way, back on 2nd base. No double play. No soup for you!

From the description in the OP, the contact between F6 and R2 occurred during the fielding attempt. That makes the contact incidental, not intentional by either player. Please cite the rule that makes R2 immune to being put out when he's off the base due to incidental contact.

If F6 had pushed him off after making the catch, we've got a different situation, since at that point he'd be playing on R2 rather than fielding a batted ball.

[mbyron]

One more thing: you point out that R2 is not required to move, which is correct. He is, however, allowed to move. And since he's not allowed to interfere with the fielder in this case, that would have been the smart play to avoid the incidental contact that forced him off the base and resulted in the out.

[amusedofficial]

Originally Posted by mbyron

One more thing: you point out that R2 is not required to move, which is correct. He is, however, allowed to move. And since he's not allowed to interfere with the fielder in this case, that would have been the smart play to avoid the incidental contact that forced him off the base and resulted in the out.

How could he avoid the incidental contact that forced him off the base without stepping off of the base to which he was entitled, thus putting himself at risk for being put out, either by tag or force? If he's not required to move, he's not required to move

[Rich]

Originally Posted by amusedofficial

How could he avoid the incidental contact that forced him off the base without stepping off of the base to which he was entitled, thus putting himself at risk for being put out, either by tag or force? If he's not required to move, he's not required to move

He's not then protected from the fielder moving into that space to make a play.