No interference called in the STL game.
 

Anyone catch the play during the Cardinals vs. Astros game last night where the thrown ball hit the on-deck hitter?

The Astros has bases loaded (maybe second and third). Base hit to CF. CFer throws home, obviously late. The ball gets past the catcher. The pitcher was backing up and was on line to get the throw.

The on-deck batter had moved up to direct traffic at the plate. He got between the throw and the pitcher and the throw hit him in the leg and changed direction, allowing the runner from second to score. It seemed that the interference was not intentional.

The umpires huddled and decided on a no-call. Seems that the first run should have scored, a dead ball called, and the other runner sent back to third. I don't think intent is a factor here.

Thoughts????

3.15

Interference by an authorized person. While the rule says it doesn't apply to teammates or coaches, the comment says what to do if the coach interferes. Another rule anamoly.

It also refefences 7.08(b) (Interference with a throw must be intentional) and 7.11 (vacate space needed to make a play).

Interfefence wasn't intenmtional.

ODB did not get in the catcher's way.

No call.

From your description, they got the call right.

7.08(b) is irrelevant as it pertains to interference by a RUNNER.

Here is the referenced 7.11. It says nothing about intent.

7.11 The players, coaches or any member of a team at bat shall vacate any space (including both dugouts or bullpens) needed by a fielder who is attempting to field a batted or thrown ball. If a member of the team at bat (other than a runner) hinders a fielder’s attempt to catch or field a batted ball, the ball is dead, the batter is declared out and all runners return to the bases occupied at the time of the pitch. If a member of the team at bat (other than a runner) hinders a fielder’s attempt to field a thrown ball, the ball is dead, the runner on whom the play is being made shall be declared out and all runners return to the last legally occupied base at the time of the interference.

Note that this rule applies to hindering the fielder. If F2 had crashed into the ODB who failed to move, then this rule would apply.

So by that logic a player (who is not a runner) could INTENTIONALLY get hit with a thrown ball and nothing should be called. I don't think that is the intent.

The rules say a RUNNER cannot INTENTIONALLY interfere with a thrown ball. They also say that players and coaches who are not runners cannot HINDER a fielder's attempt at fielding a thrown ball.

I think it is a poorly written rule, and as has been pointed out, the comment addresses a coach (and invokes intent), although coaches are exempted in the rule and intent is not mentioned.

Uh, no.

Most baseball rules are written poorly. That's why the rulebook is not the end-all and be-all of proper umpiring.

Say F7 airmails a throw to home in a sac fly situation and it hits the ODB after sailing over F2's head. OBD is appropriately stationed to signal R3 whether to slide. Is that a dead ball? Interference? In the OP the protected fielder was F2 and the throw skipped past him after a bad bounce off the mound. R3 had already touched home before the interference. B/R trotted over to third as if he had been awarded the base. Did the deflected ball end up out of play?

Day game or night game?

Night game, and the umpires were wearing heather gray pants.

So, another game from the past. Your research is outsanding.

I'm with those that say they got it right. Good no call.

Link
 

I'm pretty sure BR trotted over to his coach or ball boy to hand him some equipment. He then went back to second.

Let me ask you this:

1. If the fielder had thrown the ball correctly and not off line, would the ball have hit the on-deck batter?
2. Was the on-deck batter doing what he was supposed to be doing when the off line throw hit him?
3. Did the on-deck intentionally put himself in position to get hit with that off line throw?
4. Did you notice that the PU almost got hit with same throw before the on-deck batter was hit?

Once you answer all of the above questions, you will realize that you are barking up the wrong tree looking for an interference call.

Try and remember that we umpires have to answer all of these questions within a fraction of a second to make the proper call.

Answers:

1. No
2. Yes
3. No
4. Yes