A different take

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

Baseball Video Highlights & Clips | Must C Curious: Morgan out at home for contact - Video | nationals.com: Multimedia

Saw this play on SportsCenter this morning.

The person giving the run down on the play was saying Morgan was called out because Rodriguez had committed interference by an another teammate. It puzzled me at first because as I watching the play, I was thinking why would Morgan be trying to make contact with the catcher in this situation as that would be interference on his part. Then they showed that Morgan had missed the plate.

My question is wouldn't this be interference my Morgan and not interference by Rodriguez?

Did you see the player grab Morgan, stop him from heading to the dugout, and shove him back towards the plate?

[greymule]

Out on the physical assist. (A runner who has scored is no longer a runner.) The umps got the call right. The announcers claim, over broadly, that "you can't touch a baserunner who is a live runner."

I don't know whether OBR (like some other codes) includes a tap on the shoulder to get the runner's attention. I always figured the touch had to be an actual physical assist like a push or a pull.

[callstrikes]

I couldn't get the video to run (problem on my end) but I did see it on Sportscenter. Despite what the announcers stated, he was clearly out on interference. The runner lowered his shoulder and hit the catcher who did not possess the ball and missed the plate in the process. This business of aiding or assisting the runner by another player is not backed up by the rules. Where do you guys come up with this? What rule do you use?
It amazes me that a seasoned announcer like Bob Carpenter would assume that an out was called because of a rule that doesn't exist. After all, it makes sense. He was redirected and assisted by his teammates.
As umpires, we should know the rules, or at least take a run at the rule book before speculating on a message board. Easy interference. The runner went out of his way to prevent the catcher from making a play.

[UmpJM]

callstrikes,

Originally Posted by callstrikes

I couldn't get the video to run (problem on my end) but I did see it on Sportscenter. Despite what the announcers stated, he was clearly out on interference. The runner lowered his shoulder and hit the catcher who did not possess the ball and missed the plate in the process. This business of aiding or assisting the runner by another player is not backed up by the rules. Where do you guys come up with this? What rule do you use?
It amazes me that a seasoned announcer like Bob Carpenter would assume that an out was called because of a rule that doesn't exist. After all, it makes sense. He was redirected and assisted by his teammates.
As umpires, we should know the rules, or at least take a run at the rule book before speculating on a message board. Easy interference. The runner went out of his way to prevent the catcher from making a play.

You have a real gift for irony. Thanks for sharing.

JM

[Publius]

Anybody know for sure why he was called out? I saw nothing illegal.

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by Publius

Anybody know for sure why he was called out? I saw nothing illegal.

Morgan was ejected from the game.

[callstrikes]

A runner should be ejected at ant age or level when he lowers his shoulder into the back of a fielder not holding the ball. Really very simple. The following actions are a smokescreen.

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

Morgan was ejected from the game.

Morgan was not ejected.
The official box score (MLB.com) lists 2 ejections. Nationals pitcher Scott Olsen (who was on the bench) and Nats first base coach Dan Radison.

Both were ejected on the same play by Rob Drake (1stBU) in the 3rd inning.
The play was an interference call by Drake on Ian Desmond who had bunted and was ruled out of the running lane by Drake and interfering with the throw by Nats the pitcher Lohese who had fielded the bunt. Lohes's throw went by F3 for a two base throwing error which (at the time) resulted in a Nats runner scoring.

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by Publius

Anybody know for sure why he was called out? I saw nothing illegal.

I might have had USC on the run into the catcher. No INT as there was no play. Why the out I don't know. It ain't INT by a teamate IMHO. While Pudge was no longer a runner and might be a teammate, Morgan also was no longer a runner. Even if he was I don't see where the rule could apply to this.

[greymule]

In 2007, Josh Phelps of the Yankees deliberately went out of his way to crash Kenji Johjima of the Mariners. Johjima had positioned his foot to block the plate, but the rest of him was leaning out toward the outfield. The arrival of the ball was not imminent; in fact, in not even sure the throw ever did come home.

Phelps could have scored easily but opted instead for an obvious unnecessary standing-up crash that would have merited ejection in Fed and NCAA, but in MLB it's a no call.

However, we all know what happened when Phelps came to bat the next time.

Morgan gave an unnecessary push, but it hardly qualified as a crash.

Morgan also was no longer a runner.

He missed the plate and could still legally return to touch it, so he was still a runner. If he had touched the plate, he couldn't have subsequently been called out.

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by greymule

Out on the physical assist. (A runner who has scored is no longer a runner.) The umps got the call right. The announcers claim, over broadly, that "you can't touch a baserunner who is a live runner."

I don't know whether OBR (like some other codes) includes a tap on the shoulder to get the runner's attention. I always figured the touch had to be an actual physical assist like a push or a pull.

grey...It was a touch for sure. Rodriguez grabbed Morgan with two hands (his right hand was around his waist) and then he pushed him toward HP.

Bill Ladson writing on MLB.com confirms that Angel Hernandez made the call.
Morgan out as a result on Rodriguez assisting the runner (Morgan).

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by KJUmp

Bill Ladson writing on MLB.com confirms that Angel Hernandez made the call.
Morgan out as a result on Rodriguez assisting the runner (Morgan).

Angel made up a rule.

[Rich]

7.09(e) covers it nicely, IMO.

They added "runner who has scored" to this rule in the past few years. Did the scoring runner impede the defense? Well, I would say so, yes. Without Rodriguez grabbing Morgan and shoving him back towards the plate, Morgan doesn't retouch and there's a possibility of an appeal.

As far as the collision goes, that's a big fat nothing.

[SAump]

That would clear up the situation. My opinion is the umps goofed.

Impede the defense is hard to interpret when there is no ball in the catcher's hand. I have no interference. Now if the ball was bounding toward the plate, then Pudges action may be regarded as interference. The first baseman made no attempt to make a play on the runner by holding onto the ball, no interference.

The coach cannot touch a player. The players can touch and often do when they run into each other on the baseline and one pushes the other toward one of the bases. I have been told that if a player is injured while running the bases, his baserunning teammate can pick him up and carry him home as long as he does not pass.

(e) Any batter or runner who has just been put out, or any runner who has just scored,
hinders or impedes any following play being made on a runner. Such runner shall
be declared out for the interference of his teammate;

[callstrikes]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

7.09(e) covers it nicely, IMO.

They added "runner who has scored" to this rule in the past few years. Did the scoring runner impede the defense? Well, I would say so, yes. Without Rodriguez grabbing Morgan and shoving him back towards the plate, Morgan doesn't retouch and there's a possibility of an appeal.

As far as the collision goes, that's a big fat nothing.

I don't need to look at the book to know that 7.09 (e) concerns interference on a BATTED ball. If they added what you say they did to rule concerning interference in a double play situation I'd like to see it quoted.