Ball Hits the ondeck batter, Read on!!

[easygoer]

Situation

Bases loaded 2 outs.
Popup to 2nd base, dropped
Runner from 3rd scores
On deck batter goes to the plate to pickup the bat and chest bump the runner who just scored
1st base throws the ball home to attempt to get the runner who was advancing from 2nd
The ball hits the on deck batter(who is in the area of the plate) and goes up the 3rd base line
All runners score and the batter ends up on 3rd.

The ruling on the field, no interference or obstruction, all runs score play ball.

Please tell me that this was incorrect.


Popcorn

[Tim C]

"Please tell me that this was incorrect."

Why would you want me to lie to you?

T

[easygoer]

Ok, so could you point me in the right direction for the rule that allows the on deck batter to move into the field of play and be struck by a live ball with no penalty? Because if that is the rule it would only make sense to send them in front of the plate on any occasion when there may be a play at home. Had it hit the runner who scored I would think that 7.09 (d) or (e) would apply. The on deck guy being there is what I can't find a rule that applies to that specific situation.

Popcorn

[UmpJM]

popcorn,

He's an "offensive teammate". Unless his action is deemed to be intentionally interfering by the umpire, this is nothing but "E3".

There is a rare confluence of factors that might actually convince the umpire that interference should be called - but it doesn't sound like that's what happened.

JM

[easygoer]

Jm,

Thanks for the reply. My only problem is that by the on deck player leaving the on deck area and moving in front of the plate into the field of play and chest bumping his team mate, how would that not be considered "hindering or impededing" the fielder. The fact that the fielder was unable to make a play on the ball due to the on deck batter and the just scored runner celebrating in front of the plate would by the very definition of "hindering and impeding"

Thanks,

Popcorn

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by easygoer

Jm,

Thanks for the reply. My only problem is that by the on deck player leaving the on deck area and moving in front of the plate into the field of play and chest bumping his team mate, how would that not be considered "hindering or impededing" the fielder. The fact that the fielder was unable to make a play on the ball due to the on deck batter and the just scored runner celebrating in front of the plate would by the very definition of "hindering and impeding"

Thanks,

Popcorn

So now the runner and OD batter are in front of the plate - not just in the area - and you want us to believe that a runner who just scored is somehow in front of the plate?

What's your stake in this?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by easygoer

Jm,

Thanks for the reply. My only problem is that by the on deck player leaving the on deck area and moving in front of the plate into the field of play and chest bumping his team mate, how would that not be considered "hindering or impededing" the fielder. The fact that the fielder was unable to make a play on the ball due to the on deck batter and the just scored runner celebrating in front of the plate would by the very definition of "hindering and impeding"

Thanks,

Popcorn

There's a difference between "hindering a fielder" and "hindering the ball"

[soundedlikeastrike]

Originally Posted by easygoer

Situation

Bases loaded 2 outs.
Popup to 2nd base, dropped
Runner from 3rd scores
On deck batter goes to the plate to pickup the bat and chest bump the runner who just scored
1st base throws the ball home to attempt to get the runner who was advancing from 2nd
The ball hits the on deck batter(who is in the area of the plate) and goes up the 3rd base line
All runners score and the batter ends up on 3rd.

The ruling on the field, no interference or obstruction, all runs score play ball.

Please tell me that this was incorrect.


Popcorn

This was incorrect. Int. would have been a just call for these two OTM's "intentionally choosing to not do" what the rules clearly say they must.

But one thing is true, it was not "obstruction"

[ODJ]

Necessary
Available
Possible

Tell the PU to get the bat out of the way.

[SAump]

Originally Posted by ODJ

Necessary
Available
Possible

Tell the PU to get the bat out of the way.

Wouldn't that lead to an ejection?

A play at the plate has occurred where the action of the runner who scored, the "bat" boy, and the one who has come over to " base coach" the runner trying to score combined to block the plate umpire from clearly seeing a very close play at the plate. The PU had to literally shove a "teammate" out of the way before declaring his call.

Instant replay and rules regarding interference by the offensive team "behind" the play are not available to the umpire. The fact that the offense can and did block the sight of a plate umpire is just tuff nuggies.

Saw a play where a "big" runner slid into home plate first as the catcher was receiving the ball on the 3BLX. The catcher clearly saw a much faster trail runner racing to the plate and sliding right in behind the big guy. The catcher was shielded from applying the tag simply because the runner who scored stood up between them. Ruling: No interference.