Kansas City Ballboy Interference

[diamondstar]

On Friday Alcides Escobar hit what looked like a routine flyball into right-field foul territory. Toronto's Rajai Davis hustles over to make a catch. As he attempts the catch he runs into Kansas City's ballboy who was also attempting the catch.

Here's an article with video.

Common sense would suggest that since this was KC's home park they should suffer the penalty of the ballboy's interference (which likely was the natural result of the play). Instead the umpires ruled it a foul ball.

Could someone explain the ruling here?

[jicecone]

Could someone explain the ruling here?

"According to the umpires, since there was no contact interference wasn’t called, despite the fact that it looked closer than any fan interference call we’ve ever seen."

An uncaught batted ball in foul territory, results in a Foul Ball.

[bob jenkins]

It could have been intentional interference by a person authorized to be on the field. I think the umpires judged (perhaps incorrectly) that interference did not occur.

[zm1283]

Davis handled that better than 90 percent of MLB players would have. A lot would have flipped a lid.

[RadioBlue]

Originally Posted by zm1283

Davis handled that better than 90 percent of MLB players would have. A lot would have flipped a lid.

But not Moises Alou. He reserves his lid-flipping to fans in the stands wearing headphones and not illegally interfering.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by diamondstar

Common sense would suggest that since this was KC's home park they should suffer the penalty of the ballboy's interference (which likely was the natural result of the play).

Huh? Are you suggesting that if this had been a KC player attempting to make the catch, there would be no harm, no foul?

Not sure if you're an umpire, but we don't make differing calls when it comes to interference by a spectator or a person authorized to be on the field based upon whose park we're playing in.