Infield Fly with Interference

[Reffing Rev.]

R1 is on 2nd, R2 is on 1st. 1 out.
Batter hits a routine fly ball to f6. There is contact between f6 and r1. Both recovered before the ball reached the apex and then f6 dropped the ball. When action stops the bases are loaded. THEN PU announces "dead ball, batter is out infield fly" and returns both runners to TOP with 2 outs.

I believe inning should be over. R1 out for INT and BR out for IFF

If there is no interference, the advance is legal correct?

What say yall?

[RKBUmp]

If the umpire ruled interference, then yes, both the runner are out and the batter on the infield fly. If the umpire did not rule interference then the advance of the runners would be legal.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by RKBUmp

If the umpire ruled interference, then yes, both the runner are out and the batter on the infield fly. If the umpire did not rule interference then the advance of the runners would be legal.

Looks right.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Reffing Rev.

R1 is on 2nd, R2 is on 1st. 1 out.
Batter hits a routine fly ball to f6. There is contact between f6 and r1. Both recovered before the ball reached the apex and then f6 dropped the ball. When action stops the bases are loaded. THEN PU announces "dead ball, batter is out infield fly" and returns both runners to TOP with 2 outs.

I believe inning should be over. R1 out for INT and BR out for IFF

If there is no interference, the advance is legal correct?

What say yall?

Devil's Advocate:

What came first, the INT or the IF? Remember, if INT, the ball is dead and any subsequent anything never happened. IOW, did the INT and dead ball occur prior to the umpire being able to determine it was an IF?

[teebob21]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Devil's Advocate:

What came first, the INT or the IF? Remember, if INT, the ball is dead and any subsequent anything never happened. IOW, did the INT and dead ball occur prior to the umpire being able to determine it was an IF?

Ooh this could be a bit of a sticky wicket. Double devil's advocate, just to pile on: When does a IFF "occur", by rule?

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by teebob21

Ooh this could be a bit of a sticky wicket. Double devil's advocate, just to pile on: When does a IFF "occur", by rule?

I have always said it is at the instant the ball is batted because the rule says the batter is out when "she hits an infield fly". It does not say when the umpire recognizes or decides or announces.

The quote is from NFHS, because the ASA book does not say the batter is out unless the bated infield fly hits the batter.

I guess we are going to quibble about B vs. BR, but it doesn't matter.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by teebob21

Ooh this could be a bit of a sticky wicket. Double devil's advocate, just to pile on: When does a IFF "occur", by rule?

That is sort of my point. If the INT occurred a step or two off the base (leaving with the pitch) prior to the umpire being able to determine if an infielder, pitcher or catcher had a routine play on the ball, is it still in IF?

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

That is sort of my point. If the INT occurred a step or two off the base (leaving with the pitch) prior to the umpire being able to determine if an infielder, pitcher or catcher had a routine play on the ball, is it still in IF?

In your scenario, it might be too early to determine that INT took place. Chances are the ball wasn't even batted when the runner ran into the fielder a step or two off the base. How would you determine that F6, in this case, is a protected fielder if the ball hasn't been popped in the air? Heck, it's possible you have obstruction here.

[CecilOne]

Isn't this the sequence in the OP?
"Batter hits a routine fly ball to f6. There is contact between f6 and r1. "

For the OP, that says the ball is headed for F6, then R1 contacts F6.