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 Thu Jul 28, 2011, 03:48pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Robinson, IL
Posts: 266
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????
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jul 28, 2011, 05:38pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Illini_Ref View Post
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.
__________________
Rich Ives
Different does not equate to wrong
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jul 28, 2011, 06:22pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 605
Quote:
Originally Posted by Illini_Ref View Post
Thoughts????
From your description, they got the call right.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jul 28, 2011, 06:31pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Robinson, IL
Posts: 266
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.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jul 28, 2011, 06:48pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Upper Midwest
Posts: 928
Quote:
Originally Posted by Illini_Ref View Post
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.
__________________
"I don't think I'm very happy. I always fall asleep to the sound of my own screams...and then I always get woken up to the sound of my own screams. Do you think I'm unhappy?"
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jul 28, 2011, 06:55pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Robinson, IL
Posts: 266
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.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jul 28, 2011, 08:20pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Upper Midwest
Posts: 928
Quote:
Originally Posted by Illini_Ref View Post
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.
Uh, no.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Illini_Ref View Post
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.
Most baseball rules are written poorly. That's why the rulebook is not the end-all and be-all of proper umpiring.
__________________
"I don't think I'm very happy. I always fall asleep to the sound of my own screams...and then I always get woken up to the sound of my own screams. Do you think I'm unhappy?"
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jul 28, 2011, 08:42pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 340
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?
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jul 28, 2011, 09:07pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,779
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry1953 View Post
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?
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jul 28, 2011, 09:17pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 340
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichMSN View Post
Day game or night game?
Night game, and the umpires were wearing heather gray pants.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jul 28, 2011, 10:11pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NY state
Posts: 1,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry1953 View Post
and the umpires were wearing heather gray pants.
So, another game from the past. Your research is outsanding.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jul 28, 2011, 10:14pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,280
I'm with those that say they got it right. Good no call.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jul 29, 2011, 01:38am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 1,577
Link

Strange turn: Jay?s errant throw hits on-deck batter Bourgeois - Big League Stew - MLBBlog - Yahoo! Sports
__________________
SAump
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jul 29, 2011, 08:54am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 780
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry1953 View Post
B/R trotted over to third as if he had been awarded the base.
I'm pretty sure BR trotted over to his coach or ball boy to hand him some equipment. He then went back to second.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jul 29, 2011, 11:09am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 2,439
Quote:
Originally Posted by Illini_Ref View Post
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.
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
__________________
When in doubt, bang 'em out!
Ozzy
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
KC @ STL - Batters interference not called ? _Bruno_ Baseball 20 Mon May 25, 2009 11:48am
Game 5 Called! IRISHMAFIA Softball 4 Tue Oct 28, 2008 12:48pm
interference--who would have called this the same way? Tap Softball 26 Mon Sep 08, 2003 05:20pm
Interference Called? Chuck Turner Softball 11 Tue Jun 24, 2003 12:24pm
I called ump interference. Right or wrong? Danny R Baseball 2 Wed May 01, 2002 05:47pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:23am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1