on deck batter
 

One of my ex-house league players was on-deck and after our batter reached 1B on an infield hit, the overthrow came near him. so he picked it up and tossed it to the pitcher. By this time, the runner from 3B had already scored. So the pitcher complains to the ump that the on-deck hitter touched a live ball, even though the play was essentially over.

The ump ruled the batter out and the runner must return to 3B, taking a run off the board. There was 1 out at the time this happened.

How badly did the umpire botch this play?

Well considering this was a house league, I am sure a MLB umpire was not doing the game. Digressing from there, the umpires decision was properly directly proportional to his experience.

Based upon my overall evauluation and assesment of a situation that one would have had to been there to opine upon, and the fact that I refuse to rip apart up and coming umpires.

I can't help you, sorry.

coach g,

How did the coaches respond to this sequence of events?

JM

Botched? Hmmmm....the on deck guy picked up a live ball with a runner still on base, so the play WASN'T over. Hopefully the on deck guy learned to leave the ball alone.
You didn't say in the OP where the original throw was headed on the "infield hit". Was the defense making a play at the plate on a runner from third? Or were they making a play in the batter-runner at first? Since it was an overthrow, was the batter-runner trying to advance? Did the runner from third advance on the hit, or on the overthrow?
Details, man. It's all about ALL the details.

Sorry, coach. Until all the details are posted, it's hard to render a decision.

JJ

At the time of INT, runner had already scored and batter runner at first. Kill the play, score the run, leave runner on first and tell the on deck guy not to do it again.

the throw was wild to first. It had ended up in the on-deck circle and I called him over to tell him something. Next thing I know, the ball comes toward him and he picks it up. The runner at first was not trying to advance. The runner from 3rd scored as the ball was hit to the SS.

Given the additional info, +1

Hmmmm...... Are we calling INTERFERENCE? Because if we do, shouldn't we be getting an out also?

It's offensive teammate interference without a play. The ball is dead, and the umpires will place the runners.

I'd still like to see this question answered.

I agree therefore the question. People will tend to call interference for this play and that requires an out. Hence, the point I am trying to make especially for the amount of rookies that are on this forum now.

You're not listening, oz. Interference without a play does not involve assessing an out.

From J/R, ch. 13, sect. VI:
With bases loaded a pitch eludes the catcher and rolls toward the on-deck batter. The runners each advance one base as the catcher pursues the ball. However, the on-deck batter reaches down and pick[s] up the live ball before the catcher can get to it: interference without a play being made. The ball is dead and the runners are restricted to their one-base advance.

the coaches, including me, were quiet. I knew the umps (kids) had not seen this play before and were making it up even though they consulted each other.

I think the consensus is since the play was essentially over, the ball should have been declared dead and the runner should not have been sent back to 3B. And I should have protested the game at that point. That way we could have re-started the game from there. But who wants to do that?

Thanks for the input.

coach g,

Thanks for answering my question.

As described, personally I'm impressed.

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.

JM

+2

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?

Where did you get this from?

Reference, please. I'm not saying you're wrong, just that I don't recall reading that.

The overthrow went to the OD batter who picked it up and tossed it to F1.

Or do you suppose the catcher was backing up the plate instead of being at it?

J/R, Ch. 11 (eleven), sect. II (two):
"An authorized person is a person who is not team personnel,
but whose presence on LBT (or in the dugout) is authorized by
home team management. Examples of such persons would be
security guards, bat boys/girls, ball boys/girls, mascots,
photographers, etc. [3.15] [NFHS 1-2-3]"

My earlier post misleadingly suggested that authorized person interference can result from unintentional touching ("the ball hits...").

Thanks.

What would JR do if someone (relief pitcher / catcher) in the bull pen accidentally picked up a fair batted ball (thinking it was foul)?

Assuming that they belonged to the offense, that's covered under "Interference by an Offensive Teammate." The infraction occurs when a teammate:
1. "blatantly and avoidably hinders a fielder's try to field a fair or catchable batted ball or thrown ball."
2. "intentionally hinders or impedes a fielder's try to field a fair or catchable batted ball or thrown ball."
3. "physically assists a runner."

The penalty is that the runner being played on or assisted is out.

References are 7.09(e) and 7.11.

It's a very good question how to handle that sitch if the DEFENSIVE bullpen grabs a live ball!

Do you think the catcher would move after a loose ball? How big is the foul territory on this field? How fast was the ball moving after being deflected? You don't know where the catcher was or how far from the ball he was.

By picking up the ball the offense has deprived the defense of an opportunity to make a play. (i.e. hindered or impeded)

Really? He didn't throw anything to anyone. The instant he possessed it, play was dead. Period. Everything that happened after that didn't happen. (If you're going to go with "assistance" - which doesn't exist by the way --- then would you allow pitcher to then throw to a base and retire a runner? No ... of course not. Play was dead. This mysterious "assistance" didn't happen.)

Good luck. May you succeed where other's have failed.