Ruling on interference

[UmpJM]

mbc,

When you take 7.09(f) and 6.05(m) together, it's really pretty clear IMO:

6.05 A batter is out when—

(m) A preceding runner shall, in the umpire’s judgment, intentionally interfere with a fielder who is attempting to catch a thrown ball or to throw a ball in an attempt to complete any play:

Rule 6.05(m) Comment: The objective of this rule is to penalize the offensive team for deliberate, unwarranted, unsportsmanlike action by the runner in leaving the baseline for the obvious purpose of crashing the pivot man on a double play, rather than trying to reach the base. Obviously this is an
umpire’s judgment play.

Of course, as I initially said, HTBT.

JM

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

mbc,

When you take 7.09(f) and 6.05(m) together, it's really pretty clear IMO:



Of course, as I initially said, HTBT.

JM

Well, I've certainly learned something here. Perhaps this isn't as straight forward as I originally thought.

I don't think this is a HTBT thing. It's a rule interpretation thing.

There's no question that R1 interfered with F6. There is no need to be there. The statement of the problem indicates that the umpire is convinced that he was beyond reach of the base. He's out for interference.

The play is immediately dead. There is no question of that. Consequently, the errant throw is of no consequence.

What do we do with the batter-runner is the conundrum.

Since R1 was SAFE at 2nd there was never any chance of a double play. Yet, your citation of an authoritative interpretation seems to indicate that it doesn't matter. Maybe that's because, despite the safe-at-2nd, it was still an ATTEMPT to make a double play.

I still don't know. But it's definitely not a HTBT play.