Runner Interference - Phils - Rockies ?

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Hurdling (in and of itself) is not interference in FED.

It is illegal to hurdle, jump or leap over a fielder unless the fielder is lying on the ground. Rule 8-4-2 and Casebook 8.4.2 T and U. The runner is declared out and the "dangerous" and "illegal" acts supersede obstruction. The ball remains live unless the runner alters the fielder's play or makes contact with the fielder, in which case the ball is dead immediately for interference.

[Ump153]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

It is illegal to hurdle, jump or leap over a fielder unless the fielder is lying on the ground. Rule 8-4-2 and Casebook 8.4.2 T and U. The runner is declared out and the "dangerous" and "illegal" acts supersede obstruction. The ball remains live unless the runner alters the fielder's play or makes contact with the fielder, in which case the ball is dead immediately for interference.

So, then, as Bob wrote, hurdling, in and of itself, is not interference.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Ump153

So, then, as Bob wrote, hurdling, in and of itelf, is not interference.

I didn't disagree, did I? I merely clarified his statement. Your post was in and of "itelf" unnecessary.

[UmpJM]

Steve,

As a point of discussion, I don't believe I would judge the runner's action in the clip "hurdling" were the game being played under FED rules.

Why would you?

JM

[DG]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

Steve,

As a point of discussion, I don't believe I would judge the runner's action in the clip "hurdling" were the game being played under FED rules.

I would. Fielder was not prone. FED does not want runners jumping over fielders who are not prone. It's a safety issue to FED. It was definitely a hurdle per the FED book, can't see it as otherwise.

[Ump153]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

Steve,

As a point of discussion, I don't believe I would judge the runner's action in the clip "hurdling" were the game being played under FED rules.

Why would you?

JM

In the second clip, the "stills" appear to indicate that the runner didn't actually "hurdle" the fielder in that the fielder moved slightly toward the infield and was to the infield side of the runner's leap.

[RPatrino]

Oh please, let's split a few more minute hairs!! Without the benefit of replay and slow motion, I would have had hurdling and the runner out in FED on this play.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

Steve,

As a point of discussion, I don't believe I would judge the runner's action in the clip "hurdling" were the game being played under FED rules.

Why would you?

JM

Because the FED frowns upon leaping over infielders who are not lying on the ground.

[SethPDX]

Originally Posted by DG

When I saw it live I thought good no call, and still do. I did think it unfair to give Rollins an error on the play.

Sometimes Rule 10 isn't fair. The scorer must have judged there would have been an out if the throw was better.

I got nothing on the play. Good no-call.

[Kevin Finnerty]

Originally Posted by SethPDX

Sometimes Rule 10 isn't fair. The scorer must have judged there would have been an out if the throw was better.

I got nothing on the play. Good no-call.

There must be an error on someone to explain why Fowler's on second after a common fielder's choice. Rollins just whiffed on it with only a slight reach. That's an error.

[UmpJM]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Because the FED frowns upon leaping over infielders who are not lying on the ground.

Steve,

I saw it more as UMP153 did, that the runner jumped "behind" the fielder.

I don't think it meets the letter or intent of the rule.

But, the FED never really defines what they mean by "hurdling", so who knows?

I wouldn't call an out for hurdling on this in a FED game I was calling.

JM

[SanDiegoSteve]

The rule says jumping, leaping or hurdling a player, and it's a safety rule. And from the replays I saw of the play, the runner's spikes were directly above the fielder's back as he bent down for the ball.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

Steve,

I saw it more as UMP153 did, that the runner jumped "behind" the fielder.

I don't think it meets the letter or intent of the rule.

But, the FED never really defines what they mean by "hurdling", so who knows?

I wouldn't call an out for hurdling on this in a FED game I was calling.

JM

I would, without hesitation.

[PeteBooth]

JM FED DOES define what they mean by hurdling.

A runner in FED can hurdle a fielder IF the fielder is prone.

On the play in question Utley was NOT prone so IMO in FED this would be a "no brainer" call. R1 would be declared out.

Pete Booth

[Ump153]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I didn't disagree, did I? I merely clarified his statement. Your post was in and of "itelf" unnecessary.

Thanks for spotting the typo. I'll fix it.