DP mechanics
 

4-6-3 double play attempt. Who has primary responsibility for R1 potentially interfering at second base in two umpire system? Only runner is the one on first.

Side question. Fed rules. Runner on first. Ball hit to 2B who shovels ball to SS for force. SS throws ball to first. Throw is away but retired runner runs into SS's glove arm forcefully (not malicious). Throw doesn't get BR; it's bad. I realize this is a HTBT play but what factors might you use in your judgment?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

U1 has primary responsibility for the interference.

Factor in judging whether there is interference...if there was a slide...no slide more likely to judge interference...timing, how close it was to the throw, did the SS make an adjustment during the throw to avoid the runner and did the runner interfere, your own judgment (most likely you will have to explain your call or non-call to a coach).

In the 2013 ASA NUS in Lewiston, ME, we were told by Jim Craig that the PU has responsibility to call INT at second base on a double play ball.

HTBT, eh? OK, let's walk through my thought process here.

1) The throw is away cleanly before contact and the runner did nothing to make the throw poor? No INT; a retired runner must interfere with the play being made in order to rule INT.
2) The retired runner remains on her feet and contacts the fielder non-maliciously? Still no INT.

This play probably looks bad, and in a close game, I'm probably going to have a conversation with the defensive coach to explain the no call. I'm also going to warn the runner. There is no room for initiating unneeded physical contact with another player in this game.

Yes; and yes.

If there is no throw to first, the base umpire is in the best position to make a credible call of runner interference.

But, if a throw (or throw attempt) takes BU's head to first for the (presumably close) play there, THEN the PU has to be watching the remainder of the play and interaction at second; and be prepared to rule interference if appropriate.

This is case where PU may several responsibilities all at once; a possible lead runner around third, possible runner from third touching the plate, interaction on the batted ball with defensive players and runners, interaction at second on the front end of the double play effort, and a possible pulled foot or swipe tag at first base on the back end.

Maybe, but definitely not absolute. BU has the calls at 2nd & 1st. If the PU sees a runner interfere, s/he should be damn sure of what they are calling from 25-30 yards away when the BU is right there.

If the throw was away and unaffected, it is nothing

Are you implying that, although the contact happened after release, the runner's presence altered the throw? :confused:

Why not? Basketball gives a player 2 free throws if contact is made after the fact the ball was released :)

I'm really trying to get ideas on what to look for in this kind of situation and who should look for it and so forth. I'm not looking for confirmation that the right call was made or not made. All of you would have gotten this call perfectly correct :D I just was looking for how you would have arrived at your conclusion.

I wasn't saying should or should not, just asking if the OP meant that. :rolleyes:

Oooh boy, I don't know of too many coaches that are going to accept that as a rationale for calling INT!

It's entirely possible that the SS was affected by the proximity of the runner coming in standing up, so you would have to look for evidence of that (e.g., just as she's about to throw, she turns her head or body away). Short of that, if contact happened after the ball was released, you really can't say that the contact caused the errant throw.