Originally Posted by SAWolf (Post 776926)

Ok, I did read it:

7.09 It is interference by a batter or a runner when:
(f) If, in the judgment of the umpire, a base runner willfully and deliberately interferes with a batted ball or a fielder in the act of fielding a batted ball with the obvious intent to break up a double play, the ball is dead. The umpire shall call the runner out for interference and also call out the batter-runner because of the action of his teammate. In no event may bases be run or runs scored because of such action by a runner.

This rule references the batted ball but still says the same thing. Willfully and deliberately interferes...

Originally Posted by mbcrowder (Post 776982)

I don't see any butterflies on the field.

Both are equally relevant to this play.

Originally Posted by Larry1953 (Post 776996)

A prior post had referenced the PBUC with the bona fide term used. Does the PBUC pertain to MLB play?

Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 777010)

No, it doesn't.

Originally Posted by Matt (Post 776841)

So, why is this illegal? There is no rule against breaking up a double play.

Originally Posted by umpjim (Post 777033)

More than likely the MLBUM which does pertain to MLB might have contained or still does contain that language also. Whether Joe Torre wants that language to be adhered to is a different question.

Freeze the clip at 25 seconds and you will see what is probably a violation of the latter paragraphs of the PBUC verbiage.

In real time, a judgement call.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 777099)

Agreed that MLBUM contains it (iirc), and that it's judgment, and that the judgment might have been "wrong" and that even if MLB says it's wrong we might not know that.