Bullpen Pitcher Fields Ball

[MD Longhorn]

What does Young Referee Misleader Magazine say on the issue?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

What does Young Referee Misleader Magazine say on the issue?

If S1 is on the DEFENSIVE team, rule as I did above.

If S1 is on the OFFENSIVE team, BR is out in NCAA and OBR. (In FED, the ruling is the same as above.)

[JJ]

Following up on my previous post, the Pro rule to cite is 3:15. It is actually a bit more clear than the NCAA book - the Pro book says "...except members of the offensive team participating in the game, or a coach....or an umpire...". That tells me that players not actually playing in the game are not considered players for the purpose of this rule.

JJ

[_Bruno_]

(OBR)
if the "substitute" in the Bullpen is from the offensive team, i'd call time the moment he touches the ball intentionally and send the BR back to the last legally touched base or first base.

if he's from the defensive team, i'd award the BR the base i think he would have reached - the benefit of the doubt goes to the offensive team.

[Rich Ives]

MLBUM

6.16 INTERFERENCE BY PERSON AUTHORIZED TO BE ON PLAYING FIELD

Any act by a person authorized to be on the field under Official Baseball Rule 3.15 in which he voluntarily touches a ball in play is to be considered "intentional" interference. The ball is dead when touched and such penalty imposed as will nullify the interference. A ball that in the umpire's judgment "accidentally" touches any person authorized to be on the field under Official Baseball Rule 3.15 should be considered "unintentional" and the ball is alive and in play.

If a person authorized to be on the field unintentionally interferes with a fielder attempting to make a play, the ball is alive and in play.

The question of intentional or unintentional interference shall be decided on the basis of the person's actions. For example: A bat boy, ball attendant, security person, etc. who tries to avoid being touched by a thrown or batted ball but still is touched by the ball would be involved in unintentional interference. If, however, such person kicks the ball or picks it up or pushes it, that is considered intentional interference regardless of such person's actual intent.

In assessing the penalties under this rule, umpires should decide what in their judgment would reasonably have taken place if the intentional interference did not occur.

Play: Player in bullpen picks up a fair batted ball.

Ruling: Defensive player: Interference by person authorized to be on the playing field.

Offensive player: Interference by person authorized to be on the playing field unless in the umpire's judgment the offensive player purposely interfered with the batted ball with the intent to hinder the play, in which case the umpire shall rule offensive interference and declare the batter-runner out. Other runners would return to the base last occupied at time of interference. If the fielder is in the act of making a play on another runner when the offensive player purposely interferes, the umpire would declare such runner out and return other runners to the base occupied at time of interference. (See Official Baseball Rules 3.15 and 7.11.)

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

Offensive player: Interference by person authorized to be on the playing field unless in the umpire's judgment the offensive player purposely interfered with the batted ball with the intent to hinder the play, in which case the umpire shall rule offensive interference and declare the batter-runner out.

Thanks for the quote. I don't normally carry my baseball references around during the off-season.

The highlighted part is, I think, key.

And, in RefMag's play, S1 picked the ball up thinking it was foul, not with the intent to hinder play,

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Thanks for the quote. I don't normally carry my baseball references around during the off-season.

The highlighted part is, I think, key.

And, in RefMag's play, S1 picked the ball up thinking it was foul, not with the intent to hinder play,

I agree this is the way it should be called, but it is not the way the interp. is written.

For this rule, MLB defines intent (applicable to both offensive and defensive INT):

"If, however, such person kicks the ball or picks it up or pushes it, that is considered intentional interference regardless of such person's actual intent."

When the offensive player picks up the ball, he has, by definition, intentionally interfered.

Just a bad choice of words. I'm not going to lose sleep over it.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

I agree this is the way it should be called, but it is not the way the interp. is written.

For this rule, MLB defines intent (applicable to both offensive and defensive INT):

"If, however, such person kicks the ball or picks it up or pushes it, that is considered intentional interference regardless of such person's actual intent."

When the offensive player picks up the ball, he has, by definition, intentionally interfered.

Just a bad choice of words. I'm not going to lose sleep over it.

I imagine that the rule is written this way to put a burden on people on the field to figure out the status of a ball they encounter. Look around to see if a fielder is running at you; holler, "is this ball in play?"; something, before you pick the damn thing up.

Not a bad idea, IMO.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

I agree this is the way it should be called, but it is not the way the interp. is written.

For this rule, MLB defines intent (applicable to both offensive and defensive INT):

"If, however, such person kicks the ball or picks it up or pushes it, that is considered intentional interference regardless of such person's actual intent."

When the offensive player picks up the ball, he has, by definition, intentionally interfered.

Just a bad choice of words. I'm not going to lose sleep over it.

So why is the MLBUM play titled "Player in bullpen picks up a fair batted ball" requiring the umpire to judge intent if in fact picking up the ball is in and of itself defined as intentional?