Interference by retired runner?

[Sco53]

FED game. R1, 1 out. B1 lays down a bunt, is thrown out at first by 2 or 3 steps, then attempts unsuccessfully to dislodge the ball from the glove of F3. R1 has already rounded 2nd at the time of the contact. How should this be ruled?

[jTheUmp]

Same as you would if the interference was by a non-retired runner:

Ball becomes dead immediately.
Retired runner is out (of course, he was already out, but still).
If, in your judgement, the interference prevented a double-play on R1, R1 is also out.
If the interference did NOT prevent a double-play on R1, R1 returns to second base.

5-1-1e

[MD Longhorn]

Define "rounded" ... do you mean rounded and heading to third with a full head of steam? I have an out - definitely a possible play here by F3. If rounded means, took a couple steps around 2nd and began slowing, as if to return to 2nd, I have nothing.

In this case (as in most interferences), you must have a PLAY for there to be interference with a play. Interference with nothing is a dead ball, but still nothing.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

In this case (as in most interferences), you must have a PLAY for there to be interference with a play. Interference with nothing is a dead ball, but still nothing.

+1

I would be somewhat lenient about what constituted a "play" in this interp, but the general idea is correct.

I would also address the sportsmanship issue here.

[cbfoulds]

Originally Posted by mbyron

+1

I would be somewhat lenient about what constituted a "play" in this interp, but the general idea is correct.

I would also address the sportsmanship issue here.

Yessir: in FEDball this is one of two things that constitute the very definition of "Malicious Contact". BR is OUT and done [EJ].
And if I can see a "play" on another runner and not embarass myself, I'm getting that 2d out; but most of the time there is not gonna be a play that passes the grin test.