Hm, you might be right. I couldn't understand why he kept saying that if you call INT there has to be an out...

Has it dawned on anyone that the OD batter didn't interfere - he assisted?

Your comments are usually much more rules-based than that.

OK then - did he interfere with the defense's ability to make a play (against the rules) or enhance their ability to make a play (assist - not covered)?

If assistance, should you let the play stand and leave the punishment up to his coach and team mates? (I'd vote for this.)

The OD batter picked up a ball still in play. No assistance there.

I wouldn't defer my responsibilities to a coach and team mates.

He threw it to the pitcher. He gave it to the defense instead of making them come get it.

And that's not assistance?

What world do you live on?

The world in which offensive players do not handle balls still in play. Obviously you are a stranger here.

At the time if his first "handling" (time of interference) no one knew what he was going to do, except perhaps the Amazing Kreskin and you, the Incredible Ives. Most of the rest of us are umpires.

You have to have a play to have interference. The catcher wasn't even close. ODB made it easier.

Or is the interference rule different in your world,

Again, only you and Kreskin would have known in advance what was going to happen. The rest of us are not that good. We wouldn't have necessarily known that because we would have killed play.

I agree with UmpJM, MByron and Ozzie. (To quote JM: FWIW, I concur with mbyron & ozzy (who I believe are in "violent agreement") that a more proper call would have been (weak) "interference without a play" - kill it, put everyone where he is, mildly admonish the on-deck guy, reset and put the ball back in play.")

So everyone agrees. Leave everything as it is.

I hate to interrupt your and MrUmpire's multiple thread love fest, but this is incorrect. If it were correct, you couldn't have something called "interference without a play." I've already posted the J/R reference.

You're also judging hindering/assisting incorrectly. The defense was trying to get to the loose ball to prevent runners from advancing. The ODB hindered that effort by grabbing the ball. What he did next is immaterial because the ball was dead on the INT. So he cannot conceivably have assisted the defense.

I guess I must have misread

2.00
INTERFERENCE
(a) OFFENSIVE INTERFERENCE is an act by the team at bat which interferes with, obstructs, impedes, hinders or confuses any fielder attempting to make a play.

No interp considers "chasing a loose ball" a play.

But, in any case, sorry, I'll try to do better next time.

On Deck is authorized person, not runner
 

The question here is twofold:

1. Is the person authorized to be in the playing area?

2. Was the interference intentional or unintentional?

1. rule 3.15 defines authorized persons as being "No person shall be allowed on the playing field during a game except players and coaches in uniform, managers, news photographers authorized by the home team, umpires, officers of the law in uniform and watchmen or other employees of the home club."

In this case, the on-deck batter is authorized to be on the field

2: Rule 3.15 goes on to define and give direction - "In case of unintentional interference with play by any person herein authorized to be on the playing field (except members of the offensive team participating in the game (this means active players on the basepaths, who are covered by 7.08b), or a coach in the coach’s box, or an umpire) the ball is alive and in play. If the interference is intentional, the ball shall be dead at the moment of the interference and the umpire shall impose such penalties as in his opinion will nullify the act of interference. " The commentary goes on to give examples of unintentional interference. In a nutshell, if the individual involved tries to avoid the ball or defensive player, the ball is live and the play stands. If (and this is where your email comes in) the player picks up the ball, it is intentional interference, the ball is dead, and the umpire "shall impose such penalties as in his opinion will nullify the act of interference".

Given the situation presented, I would have called time immediately as the on-deck player picked up the ball, and determined where the offensive players were. If R2 has crossed the plate, the run stands. If BR is returning directly to 1st base, I'd place him there. If he'd turned towards second (not simply turned around to his left), he's out. If R2 has not crossed home plate, he's returning to third, and Offensive Manager will be told to talk with his player whose bonehead play caused him to lose a run (for the moment).

"Authorized person" interference never includes players or team members. It happens when the ball hits photographers, security, batboys, etc.

How are you going to explain to the OC why his BR is out on this play?