Umpire Interference Question

[SAZBA]

No one on. No one out. Batter hits ground ball to left side of infield, BU thinking batted ball got through to left field, runs into the infield to pivot to see BR touch first.

Just then the ball whizzes by the BU's head because the ball was actually fielded by third baseman deep in the hole. Umpire, as cool as the other side of the pillow, makes the "out" call at first. BR out by a few steps.

First baseman is wide eyed looking at the umpire because the BU almost got nailed in the back of the head.

I'm not going to lie. That BU was me. I seen both the third baseman and short stop go for it but I swear the ball got through.

I know about a batted ball hitting an umpire but what about a thrown ball like in this situation. Live ball, play on? If so, what if the umpire is knocked out?

[MD Longhorn]

Live ball, play on. Knocked out - go to 1-man mechanics!

Knocked out and solo ... go to 0-man mechanics ... which means - find out what they decided after you wake up.

[ozzy6900]

Umpire Interference can only happen 2 ways:

1. PU interferes with F2's attempt to retire a runner
2. BU is hit by a batted ball before it goes past a fielder, excluding the pitcher.

Any other instance of an umpire being hit by a thrown ball or in a runner's or fielder's path is not, repeat, NOT umpire interference. As MD Longhorn stated, in your situation, if you were hit, play on. Of course you should never have lost the ball. Work on that and know where the ball is at all times. Let the ball take you to the play.

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by ozzy6900

Umpire Interference can only happen 2 ways:

1. PU interferes with F2's attempt to retire a runner
2. BU is hit by a batted ball before it goes past a fielder, excluding the pitcher.

Any other instance of an umpire being hit by a thrown ball or in a runner's or fielder's path is not, repeat, NOT umpire interference. As MD Longhorn stated, in your situation, if you were hit, play on. Of course you should never have lost the ball. Work on that and know where the ball is at all times. Let the ball take you to the play.

There is a third way. Being in the runner's path has been sold as interference in an NCAA game. It seemed to work out OK.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by umpjim

There is a third way. Being in the runner's path has been sold as interference in an NCAA game. It seemed to work out OK.

Just because something was erroneously ruled in a game, that doesn't make it correct. This is in no way interference. If anything it would be umpire obstruction, and that equally does not exist.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by umpjim

There is a third way. Being in the runner's path has been sold as interference in an NCAA game. It seemed to work out OK.

Actually ... that was umpire obstruction.

[johnnyg08]

Originally Posted by umpjim

There is a third way. Being in the runner's path has been sold as interference in an NCAA game. It seemed to work out OK.

That was an incorrect ruling. Remember, just because "both coaches agree" doesn't mean it's the correct ruling.

[JJ]

Originally Posted by umpjim

There is a third way. Being in the runner's path has been sold as interference in an NCAA game. It seemed to work out OK.

Specifics? Where? When? I've been a D1 NCAA umpire for 30 years and have never heard of that either being acceptable or even happening in a college game. And it certainly flies in the face of every reputable school I've attended (Wendelstedt, for one).

JJ

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by JJ

Specifics? Where? When? I've been a D1 NCAA umpire for 30 years and have never heard of that either being acceptable or even happening in a college game. And it certainly flies in the face of every reputable school I've attended (Wendelstedt, for one).

JJ

Trust me, it happened at College Station a year or two ago. I had the same comments from some D1 guys back then on a similar kinda tongue in cheek post. Will you accept confirmation by some of the other guys on this site or do I have to dig up the OP again. It was not a correct ruling but no one complained. And actually, per M D Longhorn, it was umpire obstruction. Again tongue in cheek.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by umpjim

Trust me, it happened at College Station a year or two ago. I had the same comments from some D1 guys back then on a similar kinda tongue in cheek post. Will you accept confirmation by some of the other guys on this site or do I have to dig up the OP again. It was not a correct ruling but no one complained. And actually, per M D Longhorn, it was umpire obstruction. Again tongue in cheek.

I remember it, too.

[johnnyg08]

Originally Posted by umpjim

Trust me, it happened at College Station a year or two ago. I had the same comments from some D1 guys back then on a similar kinda tongue in cheek post. Will you accept confirmation by some of the other guys on this site or do I have to dig up the OP again. It was not a correct ruling but no one complained. And actually, per M D Longhorn, it was umpire obstruction. Again tongue in cheek.

He's right. No need to look it up. It happened.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by JJ

Specifics? Where? When? I've been a D1 NCAA umpire for 30 years and have never heard of that either being acceptable or even happening in a college game. And it certainly flies in the face of every reputable school I've attended (Wendelstedt, for one).

JJ

You were a member here when this happened at Texas A&M. It also happened in a Tennessee game. And yes, it flies in the face of the rules and every camp anyone's ever been to. And yes, it was incorrect - but they did it anyway and didn't get blasted by the NCAA for it - which shocked us all here.

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

You were a member here when this happened at Texas A&M. It also happened in a Tennessee game. And yes, it flies in the face of the rules and every camp anyone's ever been to. And yes, it was incorrect - but they did it anyway and didn't get blasted by the NCAA for it - which shocked us all here.

Apparently, JJ visits this site occasionally and doesn't remember the similar post he made back when it was first discussed and the link to the event was given. I do understand how incredulous he would be.