Batter interference?
 

Just joined the forum (5 minute ago). My experience is all Little League. I am about to join a Ca. LL District staff as UIC. There was a call in a sectional major game last month that won't go away. I was in Mexico fishing and missed it. My home league is playing and at bat. Runner on 3rd, 1 out. Catcher drops pitch and it rolls away. R3 starts home. He realizes he will not get home safely, so he u-turns it and heads back to third. Catcher picks up the ball throws to third. Batter is still in the box with bat held above his head. Ball strikes the bat. PU calls batter interference, claiming batter had time to step clear of the play at third. PU then calls R3 out and allows batter to continue at the plate. Offensive manager challenges because play was at third, batter should be out, not R3. He does not challenge the interference call. Manager then requests to protest when PU doesn't reverse the call. PU doesn't allow protest. Manager goes to tournament director for help, who also doesn't allow the protest. Manger blows up and and gets tossed.

Manager's brother is league UIC. He claims to have called W regional and was told batter should have been called out. Dist UIC hosting tournament tells me he called W regional and was told PU was correct, R3 was properly called out. in reading 6.06 (c) (several times) it appears clear to me that the call was incorrect, that the batter should have been called out.

Any help out there?:eek:

How can the PU not allow a protest? How can the TD not allow the protest? Where in Norcal are you, btw?

Lots of things screwed up here. I am not too familiar with the upper echelons of LL management but isn't there somebody at Western Region this can be brought to for the future? It's clearly too late now but it is pretty disturbing to me that a protest wasn't even heard in this situation.

We have more LL experienced folks that should be able to provide more advice.

Welcome to the forum. I am a former District 53 umpire myself.

Did the manager not know that he could refuse to play until the protest was resolved up to a final ruling at WP?

Here's the Rule

7.09 It is interference by a batter or a runner when—

(c) Before two are out and a runner on third base, the batter hinders a fielder in making a play at home base; the runner is out;

If there were 2 outs then the batter is out.

Blue got the call correct.

Pete Booth

I think the protest would be that the play was not at HB but at 3B. How the committee would rule is moot since the protest procedure was not followed.

He wasn't making a play at home, he was making a play at third.

I'm also dubious that it was even interference in the first place but I'll stop short of saying it wasn't since I did not see the play.

709(c) covers a play at home, runner is out if less than 2 outs. In this case play was at third when R3 went down the line too far. I am getting wildly different versions between the manager, fans and district. Looking for the correct call on the runner. I believe 6.06(c) covers it, even though it could be worded better.

District said there was never a protest, but again I was in Mexico fishing (thank god!)

Something fishy going on here, and I don't mean down in ol Mexico way!!

[QUOTE]The KEY phrase in your OP

Catcher drops pitch and it rolls away.

Since F2 did not catch the ball cleanly Rule 6 does NOT apply here, rule 7 does. If you do not like 7.09(c) then use rule 7.11.

B1 in your OP is classified as a member of the offensive team and not a batter.

Pete Booth

How do you figure?

He's a batter until he completes his time at bat.

7.09(c) does not apply, the play was not at home.

7.11 is applied when the person that commits the interference cannot be declared out (on-deck batter, coach, retired batter, retired runner, etc).

Rule 6.06(c) is the appropriate rule for this situation.

Disagree,

As stated when the ball gets away from F2, B1 is not classified as the batter but as a member of the offensive team. Check your materials (MLBUM / JEA BRD etc.)

Pete Booth

The rule to apply here is 7.11 and 7.11 penalty. When there is a passed ball or wild pitch the batter is considered an offensive player, he must vacate any area to allow a defensive player the chance to put out the runner. The runner is out, or the batter is out if the interference occurs on a play at home with 2 outs.

Pete, I sure don't like being wrong but I am not too proud to admit when I am. You are correct, my apologies for being so blatantly wrong.

I am the manager of this games brother. Was at the game. The discription of the play is all wrong. Not at the fault of the person that made the original post but by the rest of the district. They are changing what happened to somehow justify the call. The ball was never dropped by the catcher. He tried to make a quick back pick. The batter never left the box but the catchers hand hit the bat. The runner never tried to score, he didnt take more than a secondary lead. There was no interference but that's a judgement call. That's fine. But even if that's a judgement call they called the wrong person out and that's missing the rule. No way a protest should not have been allowed. The worse part is the the four umpires on the field never got together to discuss the call. If you are going to have four umpires during an all star game you would assume at least one of them would know the rules.

But what if 2 "knew" it to be one way and 2 "knew" it to be another way (as earlier in this discussion?

It does point out why Ipersonllay hate these types of questions -- change one small thing and the answer changes; change another and the answer changes back.

So you're the UIC?

Of the local league, yes.

And about two umpires thinking one call is right and two thinking another, I guess that could happen but at least that means they got together. Which they never did.

They didn't get together because the PU never accepted the protest (at least according to the OP). No protest, no reason to meet.

That said, I don't know why the PU and the TD didn't allow the protest to go through. I guess the question should be, was the manager protesting the interference call, or the ruling on who was out? If it was the interference call, and the PU felt that the batter did something to warrant the call, like lean back or move his bat, then a protest is not allowed since this would be a judgment call. But if the protest was because of the improper player being ruled out, or if the PU erroneously ruled that the batter should have vacated the box on the snap throw, then a protest is valid.

So, what exactly was protested??

If this is how it happened I have nothing. This is a HTBT situation since there are so many stories going around.

I think we can "guess" why there was not a protest. The original poster saw the play different from you. You have a different version and my gut tells me
if we asked several people who were at the game we would get a 3rd / 4th version.

Also, you say no interference BUT the batter held his bat high in the air according to the original OP.

Is that part correct according to you?

If so, there is a good case for an interference call. B1 is not supposed to have his bat high in the air when a play is going on.

Also, you said you were UIC so you should be backing the men and women in blue.

Manny was "spot on" in his answer as to why the 4 umpires didn't get together. There was no reason to. The other umpires would be overstepping their bounds had they interjected without the PU asking for help and if you are "truly" a UIC you should know that.

Sounds like you have a grudge against this particular group of umpires.

Pete Booth

No matter what happened the manager could have refused to continue play. If the local officials felt the protest was not about a rule they would have threatened forfeit. Then if the manager still refused to play a call would have had to be made to region and on up to rule on the forfeit.

I agree with this! A valid protest is never denied in tournament play, at least not in my experience. We aren't getting the full story on this, I suspect.

Why is it still an issue?

Make sure in the future that managers learn what to do if an umpire won't accept a protest. Cover that at the mandatory managers meeting.

But then, in our district, if a manager says "Protest" we accept it, even if we know there isn't grounds.

Rita

I am smart enough to realize that when an unpire makes a mistake they should also be told they made a mistake. I was at the game. A mistake was made. I think it makes a big difference to me that I was at the game and not saying what happened as according to what someone told me. Did I want my brothers team to win, of course, that's why I never unpire their games. But my integrity is more important to me than any game. The plate umpire said he held the bat high. I don't think he did but that's his judgement. I already said that before. Can't argue with that. But the rule is not a judgement. A rule is a rule.
Anyone that knows me knows that rules are important to me.

About the protest. I was not in the conversation between the manager and the umpire. Regardless of that the plate umpire was wrong.

And to me its not an issue anymore. The game is over and will never change. I just hope in the future the rule would be inforced properly. I have made mistakes before. I learn from them. And will make some again.

This is a question from a someone who works other sports, so it's out of ignorance.

Does it matter whether the manager requests a protest of the call (judgment) or the penalty (rule)?

Just curious.

The process for a protest, as I have been taught, is once the mgr has said he is playing the game under protest, the umpires should get together and discuss the ruling on the field, if they decide to not change it, then the UIC (home plate umpire) makes a notation in the score book about the nature of the protest and game situation at the time.

The umpires should accept any protest given to them, regardless of whether they feel its a valid protest or not. I once had a manager file a protest because the light on the snack bar didn't come on when it was supposed to, which was how the games at this field were called for darkness.

[QUOTE]Told by whom?

here is what you said which is what we are commenting on

It is you who are UIC that need to know umpire protocol.

Unless there is a protest (which there wasn't) OR the PU requests help, there is no reason for the other umpires to get involved. This has nothing to do with the other umpires knowing the rule or not.

Pete Booth

Perhaps... and perhaps not. You were not in the conversation. The correctness of the plate umpire's actions (as you should know) depend ENTIRELY on the content of that conversation. On a couple of points.

1) If the manager was "protesting" whether there was interference at all or not (like you said ... pure judgement), the umpire AND the TD were correct in not allowing this protest to move on. Judgement calls are not protestable, and not subject to the "stop everything down and call the next level up" protest procedure.

2) More importantly, and no one has mentioned this yet ... it was said the manager had a fit and got ejected. He CANNOT insist on a protest at this point. He cannot even request one - his words, after his ejection, are entirely moot.

Had the manager been arguing about who should be called out AND used the word "protest" BEFORE he was tossed - then everything else you're being told here is correct - the protest should have been called in and likely (assuming your description of the play and the umpire's description of the play line up).

(One other question ... is it possible the umpire ruled that the batter interfered INTENTIONALLY?)

As you said, you don't know exactly what was discussed between umpire and manager, and it's entirely possible that what the manager says (after the fact) he said and what he actually said differ greatly. I'd be curious to hear not only the PU's version of that conversation but the TD's version of the subsequent conversation... and whether "protest" happened before or after the ejection.

In every universe not Little League, you are correct. In LL, you don't play on after a protest. You twiddle thumbs until the person above gives a ruling, and then some more if the manager insists on pushing it up another level, et cetera ad infinitum.

That is the protest procedure for LL Tournament play, All-Stars, Regionals, etc. The process I am talking about is for regular season play. Two distinct procedures. The game can be 'played under protest', which is not a decision the umpires get to make. The manager can decide to file it or not file it, but it makes no difference to the game itself.

Both of the LL that I call for want a protestable situation settled BEFORE the game continues. Both Little Leagues have a BOD member on-site during regular season games and try to resolve the matter before the game is played under protest. It's much easier to stop the clock and take 5-10 minutes to resolve the situation than to re-start the game later if a protest is upheld.

In the leagues I worked with in California, the protest is noted in the score book and the game continues. The manager then files the protest with the league and a protest committee rules on it. My experience has been that the vast majority of LL BOD's have no knowledge of rules, and would be of no help in deciding a protest.

OK, so why were you saying they should have logged the protest and kept playing in the game we're talking about here?

Let me try this again:

In LL All Stars and above, a protest is lodged with the game UIC, UIC confers with his/her crew to attempt to resolve, if they can't resolve then UIC confers with the TD who calls "LL HQ" to get a ruling on the play. The umpires don't decide if the protest is valid.

In regular season, the protest procedure is per local league rules.

We understand what you are saying. The question is why bring up irrelevant information?

You may understand, but not everyone does. What, in your opinion, is the irrelevant information? The original post was talking about an umpire not accepting a protest in LL tourny play.

Your post about taking a protest using the non-tournament procedure.

Pardon me. I was using it to contrast tourny vs non-tourny. You may disregard if you wish.

How can you contrast something you don't mention until someone asks what your point was?

I'm sorry, but this is no longer fun...bye bye....:D

Actually, the regular season procedure you described is by LL rule 4.19. A protest report is to be filed by both the offended manager and the game UIC, and then the protest committee meets and resolves the issue.

I can't imagine a BOD member on duty at the game being given that responsibility. In my old local league, many of the BOD members knew very little about baseball (secretary, player agent, treasurer, concession stand manager, equipment manager, field maintenance manager, etc.) Asking them to resolve a protest would not take five to ten minutes. They would immediately try to call me (when I was league UIC) and chances are I'd be umpiring on another field. Then they would try to find the rule in the book and have no clue what the wording in the book actually meant, IF they found the rule in the first place. Finally they would just say Screw It and suck their thumb in the corner. :D

Agreed completely. BOD members at my field MIGHT be the UIC, or the league pres (ex UIC who knows the rules) ... or it could be the Team Mom President or the Treasurer... needed volunteers but certainly not someone I want tooling around the rulebook.

The basis for my original post was to clarify who should have been called out, the runner or the batter. Mr. Booth advised if the catcher drops the ball he becomes an OP and 7.11 applies, so calling the runner out was proper. Thank you. As stated I was not at the game (in Mexico fishing) and was told of the play and protest by others. The reason for my post was to clarify the call, not the protest. Hark Dulai is the UIC for the league hosting the tourney. His brother was the protesting manager. Hark was nothing more than a fan at that game. He replied to this post, clarifying information I had gotten wrong, including the catcher dropping the ball. Instead of taking the corrected information Hark gets bombarded because as a IUC he should "back the blue", among other things. I have since learned more information and yes the PU blew the call and yes the tourney officials dropped the ball (there was an attempt to protest).

I am a little league umpire, no more-no less. It has been suggested by several High School coaches that I join a High School Association. I have been told I have the talent to work much higher levels. Even though it is good on the ego that others think highly of my skills, being retired law enforcement with a passion to travel the world with fly rods in hand, I do not "live" umpiring like many on the board. Even though I do not live umpiring, I worked over 100 games this year and want to be the best I can be. I will soon be taking the position of our Dist UIC. When I discovered this web site I thought it would be a great avenue to get answers to questions I may have. My friend Hark Dulai is an outstanding little league UIC and HS umpire, working his way towards college ball. When he replies to this post to clarify the details he gets kicked in the teeth.

I hoped this site would be a venue for people like me to reach out to others, who have much more training, experience and knowledge. Instead I see a bunch of roosters in a ring trying to prove who has the sharpest spurs. I will hopefully find another site where it's members are not so critical of each other. I am now deleting this site from my Favorites, heading to my man cave to tie some flies for an up coming trip to Brazil. Good luck to you all.

Teeth kicked in? There's been nothing even remotely close to that in my estimation.

[QUOTE]This is an umpire Forum and here is what your friend said


I realize he is your friend but it is Hark who "blasted" the umpires who were present by saying that the "other" umpires should know the rules.

You said Hark works college and HS and therefore he should know first hand that your partner (s) do not interject themselves into the game unless there is a protest or the PU asks for assistance. There was not a protest nor did the PU ask for assistance so there was no need for the other umpires to get involved, yet Hark took exception and I can understand because his brother was coaching. "Too close to home"

In a nutshell we have a UIC (Hark) whose brother was the coach and we have yourself a friend of the UIC and when the replys were not to your liking , you call it "bashing" etc. when all were were doing is responding to the facts presented. Hark is the one who threw the other umpires under the bus by his comments.

Pete Booth

Wow.

If that was "bashing" I can't see how you survive a single day on the field.

Much less a career as a LEO.

Maybe our high school association is a little different but we are told to get your partners attention if a rule was misinterupted. We are told to try to get things right. I would still do things that's way. I don't know where this "umpires are always right" came from. I would rather learn from a mistake then just go on assuming I am right.

Since you put it into quotes, I'll ask, who here said "umpires are always right?"

"I said it."

Happy............... Pappy?

First off, what you hear from your high school association does not necessarily apply in a LL game. The rules and procedures have differences. What may be perfectly acceptable in a high school game may be totally inappropriate in LL play.

Yes, you should try to get things right. But in LL Tournament play, the proper procedure to start that process is for the manager to lodge a protest, not for an umpire who had no role in the play to come in and try to make his/her partner change the call.

Just to make sure I'm clear. I thought if you knew a rule was misapplied on the field you should get with your partner and correct it. However, if you are not certain of what your partner saw and thus whether or not a rule was misapplied than you should do nothing.

Speaking strictly LL, which is the basis of the OP, here is what is written in the LL Rules Instruction Manual under rule 9.02(c):

"Keep in mind that the umpire who has made the rules decision is the only one who may initiate the discussion. Regardless of the experience or knowledge, no other umpire may force the discussion or overrule the decision. If a manager has a concern with a rules decision, he/she must take his/her case to the umpire who made the decision."

So you don't correct your partner on your own. You wait until he comes to you, either after a manager questions the call, or after a protest is lodged.

Again, that's what LL teaches. Other organizations may allow for another umpire to fix a misapplied rule. Maybe LL wants it this way because it has a well-defined process for dealing with protests.

I agree that is the way it usually is handled but there a few situations that I wonder about. One example is your PU gives 2 bases on a pitched ball going out of play due to a brain fart. Nobody questions it and your PU doesn't pick up your "I got something signal". Do you leave it alone. Later in the game you might have to award one base on a pickoff out of play and be questioned on it.
I do know that Wendelstedt teaches that if your partner calls IFF when it's not correct by rule that you should immediately call and signal that there is no IFF.

I feel that all umpires on the field are equally responsible for trying to avoid misapplications of rules and protests.

I had one person tell me, if you as the base umpire pointed at the ball, the IFF was actually called.

What's the signal for "No IFF"?

When it happens I hope you will come up with one. If it does happen, whether you call it off or not, the teams should know its not an IFF and maybe you get less grief if one of you has patented the "no IFF signal". Based on my experience, I will be doing the WTF or Oh shit signal, which nobody will be seeing. I don't think I have a verbal for that yet.

Agreed if the "other" umpires are 150% certain that a rule was misapplied.

I give benefit of doubt to my partner making the call. Perhaps he saw something different then me.

Let's takes umpjm's simple example of a pitched ball going out of play and the PU awards 2 bases.

I step in and say no he only gets one base. We then converse and my partner says "Pete F2 kicked the ball into DBT while chasing the errant pitch which is the reason I awarded 2 bases".

Now we as a group look like s**t and give the appearance we do not know what the h**l we are doing. In addition your partner will give you that look like "stay out of my business unless I ask for your help" Our credibility will be questioned the remainder of the game.

Let the manager do his job if he doesn't like or agree with a rule interp.

In a nusthell, unless it's a "no brainer" the other umpires should not say or do anything unless the manager lodges a protest or the umpire who made the call requests assistance.

Pete Booth

Pete, I don't mean that you change your partners call, uninvited or unsolicited. The only time I would see doing that is if your partner doesn't see the ball on the ground on a tag play and you do.

I don't have a problem, if I have made an error applying a rule, if my partner comes to me to discuss it.

You STILL don't do it in this case.

Even if you do not ask him to?

To me this is no different then the BU making a call at first base on a swipe tag / pulled foot. You as PU clearly see that F3's foot is off the bag but your partner calls him out. Unless your partner comes to you for assistance, you keep quiet.

Pete Booth

I am at the point in my career where I am going to interject myself in my partner's play if I am 150% certain a RULE has been kicked. [With that said, it does not happen very often.] Admittedly, part of the reason is that almost every high school and American Legion game I umpire, I am the crew chief and "most experienced" (note I did not say "oldest!") member of the crew.

I'll give two examples (one where my crew chief in MiLB interjected in one of my calls and one where I interjected in my partner's play).

1) MiLB game. R1. Ground ball to F6 on a hit-and-run. F6 sprints to second base in an attempt to retire R1, but I call R1 "safe". (There was no argument, at all, about the "safe" call...R1 was clearly safe.) F6 then threw onto F3 in an attempt to retire the B/R, but the throw went into the stands. I say, "time! You (R1) third base; you (B/R) second base!"

As soon as I finished, my crew chief took a few steps toward me and said, "Matt..." and that was all he had to say. As soon as he said my name I knew I had screwed up. I stood up tall, looked at R1 (who was now on third base) and said, "you score!"

The DT manager came out, and we had a long discussion/explanation. But, to his credit, once he learned the rule (we had to teach him) he did not get ejected.

I am very grateful that my crew chief interjected himself immediately, so that I could correct myself immediately, rather than us "get together" after the play which would have, IMO, given the impression that one umpire was overruling another umpire.

2) Legion with OBR. I'm on the plate and also the CC. R1, R2. Ground ball on the left side of the infield. F5 dives to his left to try to field the ball, but the ball is a good 1 to 2 feet out of his reach. Ball then hits R2. F6 is positioned behind R2 and is in position to easily field the ball and possibly make a play. (Prior to the pitch, F5 was playing off the line and F6 was pinching over into the hole).

There was no doubt that the ball hit R2; the ball clearly hit him and clearly changed directions, significantly. (The ball ended up deflecting into foul territory down the left field line). There was also absolutely no doubt that F6 was in position to field the ball had it not hit R2.

I waited and waited for U3 to call "interference," but he did not. This was a major play at a very critical part of the game. (Close game in late innings.) I decided that it would be much, much easier to kill the play immediately rather than to get the crew together after the play and then have to "reverse" ourselves and call runners back out of the dugout, etc.. So, I stepped out in front of home plate and yelled (and gave the proper mechanics), "time! time! time! That's interference! you're out! You (R1) back to second base, you (B/R) to first base!"

And, yes, I had a heated argument with the OT head coach. (His argument was, first, that it was not interference because it had passed the diving third baseman. But, when I asked, "did you see the shortstop" ready to field the ball, he said "that doesn't matter." So, I then had to explain the exception to the rule to him. Since he didn't like my explanation of the exception, and since he, like most coaches, didn't actually know the rules (so he really couldn't argue rules with me), he switched his argument to "that's not your call," which I expected him to say at some point.)

IMHO, when a coach argues, "that's not your call," it means he really doesn't have anything legitimate further to argue about.

BTW, after the game, U3 said, "thanks, I froze."

(Edited to Add: I should add that after the ball had hit R2 and before I called interference, the DT coaching staff was already screaming "interference". So, no matter what, we were going to have an argument after the play. Furthermore, I knew U3 well enough to know that when the DT head coach would have come out to argue, that U3 would have come to me for help. Of that, I am 150% sure, too. So, when I called "interference," I was already sure that if I did not call interference while the play was still on-going, I was going to have to do it after a "crew huddle" after the play.)

I probably wouldn't have called interference, but you're right, it definitely is.

[QUOTE]Just want to understand your point completely.

Using the example I gave

Your partner the BU calls out on a call at first base where F3 had to stretch. You as PU clearly see the pulled foot. Your partner does not request your assistance.

In that case you are going to over-rule your partner without being asked?

If so, I have never been taught this.

Also, your second example is not a case of interjecting yourself in your partner's call. There was NO call at all and all umpires have authority to call interference.

Pete Booth

Your play is judgment, Pete.

The others are rules.

And, I agree with lawump on his examples.

Yes, we are talking rules and interpretations. Not pulled foot calls or anything involving judgement. If I am improperly awarding bases, I want my partner to clue me in. If I didn't see something that happened that changes the way a rule is interpreted, I want to know. Don't we all? :confused:

If you are 150% a rule is being screwed up (and you're not working LL), fix it (your method may vary depending on the sitch and whether play is live).
If you are 150% a judgement call has been screwed up, keep your trap shut until asked.

[QUOTE=PeteBooth;904110]On the pulled foot at F3...no. No rule (or rule interpretation) issue at all. That is a judgment call. Might be a "gross miss" judgment call...but a judgment call, none-the-less.

In my second example, if I had done what I did in a MiLB game (when I was a MiLB umpire) I would have had my ass handed to me on a silver platter by U3 after the game. In the Legion game situation I posted, I, in my opinion, was clearly stepping on U3's toes because I knew he clearly was frozen (he had a deer-in-the-headlights look).