Interference Rule on Foul Fly Ball

[GA Umpire]

I figured I would start a new thread with this quote instead of taking focus from another one.

Originally Posted by Tim C

Ok, my new favorite:

We know that the NFHS made a change this season in a play where a base runner interfers with a fielder attempting to catch a foul fly ball.

We now know that is ALL cases the runner interferring is declared out.

Situation:

Tie Game
Bottom of the 7th
The Worlds Greatest High School Hitter at Bat
2 Outs
R2
1 Ball 2 strikes

F1 jams TWGHSH and he hits a foul fly slightly to the left of the third base bag.

As F5 sets under the ball in an attempt to retire TWGHSH.

A smart R2 thinks: "wow, if I run into that guy TWGHSH will get a new at bat in the bottom of the 7th!"

R2 runs into F5 (not anything near MC) and F5 drops the ball.

R2 is declared "out" and TWGHSH gets a new at bat in the next inning.

ALL THEY HAD TO DO: "with two out the batter is declared 'out'".

ALSO do not read the ruling in the Illustrated NFHS Rule Book as it still claims the batter is "out" at all times.

T

Is this just a FED thing of what has been highlighted? My question is b/c it is a foul ball.

In OBR, wouldn't R2 be declared out and TWGHSH get put on 1B? Thus still losing his chance at getting another opportunity to hit again.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by GA Umpire

In OBR, wouldn't R2 be declared out and TWGHSH get put on 1B? Thus still losing his chance at getting another opportunity to hit again.

The INT is the 3rd out.

[GA Umpire]

I understand the INT is the 3rd out. But, part of the penalty is to put the batter on 1B. Wouldn't that still be enforced even though the out was made at the same time the batter would be put on 1B?

[UmpJM]

GA Umpire,

Under OBR, the batter would only be awarded 1B if the runner interfered with the defense's opportunity to field a fair batted ball.

If the runner interferes with a fielder's opprtunity to catch a foul fly, it is simply a foul ball to the batter.

JM

[DG]

3rd out. Batter comes up again in the bottom of 8th. By then the visitors may score 3-4 runs to go ahead and his at bat can be no more than 1 run.

Now another scenario. If runner is so smart 3B coach is smarter and interferes first....

[Matt]

Originally Posted by DG

Now another scenario. If runner is so smart 3B coach is smarter and interferes first....

How would that be smarter?

[GA Umpire]

Originally Posted by Matt

How would that be smarter?

My question exactly. No matter who interferes, there will be an out recorded. If the coach interferes, then the batter is out no matter what by rule 7.11 since he is the one who the play is being made on. And, if it is intentional, he runs the risk of being ejected by the umpire depending on what he did.

That would be a dumb coach. A smart one lets the runner do it since his batter will be coming back up to hit again.

[PeteBooth]

Originally Posted by GA Umpire

.

FWIW here is the FED interp


SITUATION 6: R1, on second base, rounds third and runs into F5 as he attempts to field a foul fly ball. This action occurred with (a) a count of 1-1; (b) a count of 1-2; or (c) two outs.

RULING: In all three instances, R1 is out for his interference. In (a), the batter returns to bat with a count of 1-2 and in (b), the batter returns to bat with a count of 1-2 as the pitch is treated as a foul for the batter’s count. In (c), B4 will lead off in his team’s next offensive half-inning. (7-4-1f)

Pete Booth

[DG]

Originally Posted by Matt

How would that be smarter?

I don't know. I had a senior moment.

[GA Umpire]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

GA Umpire,

Under OBR, the batter would only be awarded 1B if the runner interfered with the defense's opportunity to field a fair batted ball.

If the runner interferes with a fielder's opprtunity to catch a foul fly, it is simply a foul ball to the batter.

JM

I know this thread has passed but I have a quote from Wendelstedt which seems to contradict this statement.

From Wendelstedt:

By the way, this is the same for any fly ball where a runner interferes with a fielder: the runner is out and the batter is awarded first base, regardless of where the ball is touched after the interference, or what would have happened on the play. Again, if you are going to see what would have happened, why not call the batter out as well if the ball is eventually caught?

Also, from Wendelstedt:

We agree that this doesn't seem the most ideal ruling, however, it is hard to call a ball foul when it never becomes foul. We are working though, to provide suggestions to Major League Baseball in ways to correct these issues within the spirit of the rules.
We have made the suggestion that the definitions of fair and foul balls be edited to include that a ball become fair or foul when a batted ball in flight is over fair or foul territory when interference occurs.
This, we believe, would solve the contradictions in the rulebook, and offer a solution that falls within the spirit of the rules.

It appears in an OBR game that it doesn't matter if the ball is fair/foul. Batter gets 1B on the INT. This would have been my ruling before until this thread. In an OBR game, I am still inclined to call the interfering runner out and send the batter to 1B.

I know what J/R says. Since this appears to be the way MLB is calling the play, I am wondering if JEA has something about it. Mainly b/c I would say it's author is on the same level as Wendelstedt and it would be in writing. If not, I guess the batter gets 1B in my OBR games based on the above quote.

[DownTownTonyBrown]

I think if you check the full context of your first Wendelstedt quote you will find that he is talking about a fly ball in FAIR territory - not foul.

There is no way to put a batter on base when he hits the ball foul.

[GA Umpire]

Originally Posted by DownTownTonyBrown

I think if you check the full context of your first Wendelstedt quote you will find that he is talking about a fly ball in FAIR territory - not foul.

There is no way to put a batter on base when he hits the ball foul.

No where do I see fair in the quote. It says any. Also, they go on to say that a ball cannot be judged fair/foul if it was never fair/foul to begin with. And, the second quote coincides with the idea. Both quotes say "Runner is out and batter gets 1B".

However, it also states that they are trying to get MLB to change the ruling so it can be determined if the ball is fair/foul at the time of INT. Thus, would then make the umpire judge the status of the ball at INT and whether or not to put the batter on 1B.