The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 20, 2011, 09:26am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 362
Error & Interference??

Interesting situation last night....

R2, batter hits the ball between F5 & F6. F5 runs to make a play on the ball and misses the ball, F6 was also running towards the ball but gets hit by R2 on his way to fielding the ball.

Does F5's error overrule the interference on F6?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 20, 2011, 09:39am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Not nearly enough information.

A) Which rule set (yes, it could matter)
B) Did the ball pass "immediately by F6"?
C) Did F5 have a play on the ball?

You might have INT. You might have OBS. Depends on the answers to the questions.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 20, 2011, 10:06am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder View Post
Not nearly enough information.

A) Which rule set (yes, it could matter)
B) Did the ball pass "immediately by F6"?
C) Did F5 have a play on the ball?

You might have INT. You might have OBS. Depends on the answers to the questions.
a) We're in Canada so we only use OBR.
b) Ball went right through F5 however, he didn't touch it.
c) F6 did have a play on the ball but was on the ground when the ball went by him. F5 had a good chance of making an out at first if there wasn't a collision with the runner.

There is obviously either obstruction or interference.....the question is which?

Last edited by tibear; Fri May 20, 2011 at 10:09am.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 20, 2011, 10:10am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by tibear View Post
a) We're in Canada so we only use OBR.
b) Ball went right through F5 however, he didn't touch it.
c) F6 did have a play on the ball but was on the ground when the ball went by him.

There is obviously either obstruction or interference.....the question is which?
Was F6 the "protected fielder" at the time of the contact? If so, it's int. If not, it's OBS.

In this instance, as I read the play, F5 was initially the protected fielder. If the contact occurred before the ball went through F5, then it was OBS.

Once the ball went through F5, F6 *could have become* the protected fielder *IF* you judged that he had a play -- that is, could have fielded the ball and then had a reasonable attempt at a put-out (if the latter isn't true, then he was jsut "chasing a loose ball.")
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 20, 2011, 11:18am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 362
I called interference, didn't get any discussion but wondered if F5's error should have overridden the interference call.

I'm assuming that if F5 had actually touched the ball that it would then be obstruction called on F6 or would it have been a judgement call on my part as to whether F5 truly had committed an error or whether he had a realistic chance of making a play on the hit ball. i.e. a hard line drive that F5 quickly reacts to, touches it but doesn't make the catch and deflects it on the ground towards F6. Again F6 should probably be protected.

Last edited by tibear; Fri May 20, 2011 at 11:22am.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 20, 2011, 12:03pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Luckily we umpires never have to decide whether a fielder made an error or not. None of that should be part of your thought process. Who is protected. Period. If an unprotected fielder contacts your runner, it's OBS. The "error" and whether it overrides anything is immaterial.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 20, 2011, 12:19pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Seattle WA
Posts: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
...Once the ball went through F5, F6 *could have become* the protected fielder *IF* you judged that he had a play -- that is, could have fielded the ball and then had a reasonable attempt at a put-out (if the latter isn't true, then he was jsut "chasing a loose ball.")
Bob, How typical is it to change the protected fielder? It seems like a huge disadvantage to the runner. The runner is trying to avoid the fielder he sees trying to make a play (F5 in this case). In doing that he now has to account for other fielders in the vicinity? Seems unreasonable.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 20, 2011, 12:31pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by tibear View Post
I called interference, didn't get any discussion but wondered if F5's error should have overridden the interference call.

I'm assuming that if F5 had actually touched the ball that it would then be obstruction called on F6 or would it have been a judgement call on my part as to whether F5 truly had committed an error or whether he had a realistic chance of making a play on the hit ball. i.e. a hard line drive that F5 quickly reacts to, touches it but doesn't make the catch and deflects it on the ground towards F6. Again F6 should probably be protected.
First, the error doesn't override any interference call.

Second, your asusmption is wrong. the runner is protected from (unintentional) interference with a deflected BALL, but not from interference with a FIELDER fielding a deflected ball.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 20, 2011, 12:45pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 362
OK, now I'm a confused.

I've always been told that a defender has the priority when playing a ball coming directly off a bat, however, if a defensive player had a clear chance to make a play on the ball and bobbles the ball, the defense is no longer playing a batted ball but a loose ball and must now ensure they do not obstruct a runner from advancing.

Now you seem to imply that a missed opportunity by the defense to make a play on a batted ball has no bearing on whether a subsequent play on the same ball can be ruled interference.

Last edited by tibear; Fri May 20, 2011 at 12:49pm.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 20, 2011, 12:58pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by tibear View Post
OK, now I'm a confused.

I've always been told that a defender has the priority when playing a ball coming directly off a bat, however, if a defensive player had a clear chance to make a play on the ball and bobbles the ball, the defense is no longer playing a batted ball but a loose ball and must now ensure they do not obstruct a runner from advancing.

Now you seem to imply that a missed opportunity by the defense to make a play on a batted ball has no bearing on whether a subsequent play on the same ball can be ruled interference.
Which "you" were you responding to?

You have to decide which fielder is protected. Period. Unless you're dealing with a runner struck by a ball, none of the other stuff mentioned matters. If you had F5 protected, and F5 deflects the ball to F6, F6 is not suddenly protected --- but the runner STILL must avoid the ball (assuming F6 has a play).
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 20, 2011, 01:15pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,057
Send a message via Yahoo to UmpJM
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder View Post
Which "you" were you responding to?

You have to decide which fielder is protected. Period. Unless you're dealing with a runner struck by a ball, none of the other stuff mentioned matters. If you had F5 protected, and F5 deflects the ball to F6, F6 is not suddenly protected --- but the runner STILL must avoid the ball (assuming F6 has a play).
Mike,

No, if the ball is deflected by F5, then the runner is absolved of liability for being unintentionally hit by the (deflected) ball.

If F6 DOES have a legitimate opportunity to make a play on the deflected ball (in the umpire's judgment) then he IS protected and the runner must avoid him.

JM
__________________
Finally, be courteous, impartial and firm, and so compel respect from all.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 20, 2011, 02:00pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 362
So when does a "batted ball" become a "loose ball"? Is it when you determine the defense no longer has a legitimate chance at a play?
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 20, 2011, 02:02pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by tibear View Post
OK, now I'm a confused.

I've always been told that a defender has the priority when playing a ball coming directly off a bat, however, if a defensive player had a clear chance to make a play on the ball and bobbles the ball, the defense is no longer playing a batted ball but a loose ball and must now ensure they do not obstruct a runner from advancing.

Now you seem to imply that a missed opportunity by the defense to make a play on a batted ball has no bearing on whether a subsequent play on the same ball can be ruled interference.
If the defender bobbles the ball and must move, *he* is generally not protected. *Another* fielder might be, however.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 20, 2011, 02:22pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
If the defender bobbles the ball and must move, *he* is generally not protected. *Another* fielder might be, however.
So given the following scenario, a ball is hit to F5 who bobbles the ball towards F6. Both F5 and F6 are moving to the ball to make a play and both have legitimate chances to make a play.......F6 would be protected but not F5?

Would "generally" mean that if he still had a chance to make a play then F5 would be protected?

Does it really come down to the fact then that a defensive player, who the umpire deems has a chance to make a play, is protected from interference by an offensive player? Regardless of what took place before the interference?
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 20, 2011, 02:30pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NY state
Posts: 1,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by tibear View Post
So given the following scenario, a ball is hit to F5 who bobbles the ball towards F6.
No. Who's on first.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is NFHS Case Book Play 2.10.1 Sit. G(d) (re: corr. error situation) really an error? rpirtle Basketball 3 Wed Dec 24, 2008 03:25pm
Interference after an error... jonesmael Softball 35 Wed May 10, 2006 10:05am
Runner interference versus umpire interference Jay R Baseball 1 Thu Apr 28, 2005 07:00pm
Interference after error WestMichBlue Softball 8 Thu May 06, 2004 08:08am
Player Error or Referee Error??? BK Basketball 21 Fri Jan 16, 2004 01:04pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:08pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1