What if...

Chris Viverito · #1 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 24, 2011, 08:20pm

Fed rules.

7-2-5 Penalty

The batter shall not:

Interfere with the catchers fielding or throwing

If the pitch is a 3rd strike and in the umpires judgment interference prevents a possible double play (additional outs) interference prevents a possible double play (additional outs). two may be ruled out.

1 - 2 count. R1 stealing 2d. B2 swings and misses, then interferes with F2's attempt to retire R1. Umpire judges a possible double play.

Ruling: B2 is out for strike 3. R1 is out for interference.

Question: Is there a scenario of this sitch where the R1 would not be called out for the interference?

jicecone · #2 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 24, 2011, 08:54pm

I think you mean 7-3-5 Penalty.

B1 causes the interference however, because B1 is already out then the umpire can also call out the runner being played on if the umpire judges a possible double play.

R1 just ends up being called out for the batters interference. R1 has not comitted any infraction but the batter has, and he has struck out also..

Question: Is there a scenario of this sitch where the R1 would not be called out for the interference?

For the batters inteference? Only if the umpires judges that a double play was not possible. Eg. Batter strikes out and crosses in front of catcher. Catcher goes to take the ball out of his glove to throw and drops the ball.

ManInBlue · #3 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 24, 2011, 09:05pm

R1 would not be out if B had a 1-1 count when this happened - would he? B out, R1 returns...

Someone tell me if lost my mind.

Otherwise, I agree - strike 3 B out and R1 out b/c of INT.

Chris Viverito · #4 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 24, 2011, 09:22pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by jicecone

I think you mean 7-3-5 Penalty.

For the batters inteference? Only if the umpires judges that a double play was not possible. Eg. Batter strikes out and crosses in front of catcher. Catcher goes to take the ball out of his glove to throw and drops the ball.

Correct. I did mean 7-3-5 penalty.

As for your answer 'only if'...it does not apply to my sitch. The sitch has the batter interfering. Key elements...

The batter strikes out, then interferes with F2's attempt to retire R1. Is there any reason why R1 would not be out in this situation?

Chris Viverito · #5 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 24, 2011, 09:25pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by ManInBlue

R1 would not be out if B had a 1-1 count when this happened - would he? B out, R1 returns...

Someone tell me if lost my mind.

Otherwise, I agree - strike 3 B out and R1 out b/c of INT.

No, R1 would not be out if the count was 1 & 1. B2 would be out and R1 would be returned too 1st.

For my question, none of the elements may change. Here they are again:

1 & 2. 0 out. B2 strikes out, then interferes with F2, who is trying to retire R1. Is there any reason that R1 will not be called out in this situation?

ODJ · #6 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 24, 2011, 09:35pm

I get two outs on this play. If R1 isn't out by rule here, this scenario would happen every game.

UmpJM · #7 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 24, 2011, 09:38pm

ODJ,

What if the R1 had been obstructed by F3 as he took off for 2B?

JM

jicecone · #8 (**permalink**) Thu Mar 24, 2011, 10:09pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Viverito

Correct. I did mean 7-3-5 penalty.

As for your answer 'only if'...it does not apply to my sitch. The sitch has the batter interfering. Key elements...

The batter strikes out, then interferes with F2's attempt to retire R1. Is there any reason why R1 would not be out in this situation?

Chris, the rule reads that two outs "may" be called. Not shall or must. I gave you an example but, and there are many more however the rule allows the official to make a call of judgement.

bob jenkins · #9 (**permalink**) Fri Mar 25, 2011, 06:50am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Viverito

No, R1 would not be out if the count was 1 & 1. B2 would be out and R1 would be returned too 1st.

For my question, none of the elements may change. Here they are again:

1 & 2. 0 out. B2 strikes out, then interferes with F2, who is trying to retire R1. Is there any reason that R1 will not be called out in this situation?

98.3% of the time, R1 will also be out. But, if F1 mistakenly pitches from a wind-up, or R1 is a state 30-yard dash champ, and F2 has a rag arm, and the pitch is a change in the dirt that F2 doesn't catch cleanly, ...

It's happened once to me in my career where I sent the runner back instead of getting an out.

Chris Viverito · #10 (**permalink**) Fri Mar 25, 2011, 08:45am

Thanks for the replies. I asked this question because I have an issue with the wording in the rules book. All of these suggested possibilities seem to apply to the wording logically. I'll try to remember that there is a 1.7% chance that the penalty will be to return the runners rather than call the out. As usual - it comes down to my judgment - which is usually horse poo-doo anyway. Of that there is a 99.347 % chance...unless I've been drinking Red Bull.

jicecone · #11 (**permalink**) Fri Mar 25, 2011, 12:34pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Viverito

99.347 % chance.

There is probably a slightly higher chance that your going to have to toss the Coach after he tells you that that is, a "horsesh*t call" , "your terrible".
"I can't believe you can call something like that," "You have no clue what your doing," "Your trying to hose us", "Your father wears high heel shoes," and my all time best, "Your ugly too."

Have a good season

UmpJM · #12 (**permalink**) Fri Mar 25, 2011, 12:51pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by jicecone

There is probably a slightly higher chance that your going to have to toss the Coach after he tells you that that is, a "horsesh*t call" , "your terrible".
"I can't believe you can call something like that," "You have no clue what your doing," "Your trying to hose us", "Your father wears high heel shoes," and my all time best, "Your ugly too."

Have a good season

"Coach, I had already inferred you were displeased by my call. Did you have a question?"

JM

Chris Viverito · #13 (**permalink**) Fri Mar 25, 2011, 01:09pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by jicecone

There is probably a slightly higher chance that your going to have to toss the Coach after he tells you that that is, a "horsesh*t call" , "your terrible".
"I can't believe you can call something like that," "You have no clue what your doing," "Your trying to hose us", "Your father wears high heel shoes," and my all time best, "Your ugly too."

Have a good season

Right...but the chance goes down exponentially if it is raining, very very cold out...or very very hot.

Thanks J. Best to you too.

Suudy · #14 (**permalink**) Fri Mar 25, 2011, 01:36pm

So what about multiple people on base? No outs, 1-2 count, R1 and R2 attempt a double steal. B1 strikes out and interferes with F2's attempted throw to third.

R2 out and R1 back to first?

Simply The Best · #15 (**permalink**) Fri Mar 25, 2011, 01:42pm

Originally Posted by jicecone

There is probably a slightly higher chance that your going to have to toss the Coach after he tells you that that is, a "horsesh*t call" , "your terrible".
"I can't believe you can call something like that," "You have no clue what your doing," "Your trying to hose us", "Your father wears high heel shoes," and my all time best, "Your ugly too."

Quote:

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

"Coach, I had already inferred you were displeased by my call. Did you have a question?"

The cute one-liner is not only unnecessary it will only further inflame an out of control coach.

"Coach, did you have a question?" is simple, direct and doesn't buy you an unneeded continuation of harassment or argument.