BR collides with F3 after catch

[teebob21]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

Runners return at time of INT.

Correct. I mistyped. I also may have misread the play as described, so there's that too. I didn't think this was INT by a retired runner on the first pass, since it sounds like the fielder was in the process of making an initial play on the ball (attempting to retire the BR on the popup) when the INT occurred.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by DTQ_Blue

I agree with you that only because the runner chose to advance after the collision, was the collision interference. If the runner had stayed put, no interference. I didn't like having to make that call, but I think my partner was right, by the book.

Therein lies the conundrum. If the ball is dead due to the collision, there is no advancing runner on which to make a play. And if there is no play available, how can you meet the definition of INT?

[youngump]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

My issue with the play and applicable rules is that there was no interference. As noted, the runner did not break for home until F3 was knocked to the ground, so at the time of the collision, there was no play with which to interfere.

(Bold mine) Why does the bolded part have to be true? It seems to me the most minimal stretch is to treat this the same way we treat obstruction. It's actively happening until the runner recovers. Thus a runner tripped going around second just before getting to the base who falls between 2nd and 3rd was obstructed in between both 1st and 2nd and 2nd and 3rd. A fielder knocked down is actively interfered with until she recovers (but it wouldn't be a play if there was nothing to do in that time period). Usually that doesn't matter because the interference kills the ball. Here it would matter.
I'm not necessarily arguing for this (though it makes the most sense to me) just asking why that isn't the best reading of the hole in the rules.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by youngump

(Bold mine) Why does the bolded part have to be true? It seems to me the most minimal stretch is to treat this the same way we treat obstruction. It's actively happening until the runner recovers. Thus a runner tripped going around second just before getting to the base who falls between 2nd and 3rd was obstructed in between both 1st and 2nd and 2nd and 3rd. A fielder knocked down is actively interfered with until she recovers (but it wouldn't be a play if there was nothing to do in that time period). Usually that doesn't matter because the interference kills the ball. Here it would matter.
I'm not necessarily arguing for this (though it makes the most sense to me) just asking why that isn't the best reading of the hole in the rules.

So you are not going to kill the ball at the time of the collision? Anything subsequent to the ball becoming dead is irrelevant. On an INT call, we even suspend and rule on the location of the ball at the time of the INT and regardless of where the ball goes, its status does not change.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

So you are not going to kill the ball at the time of the collision? Anything subsequent to the ball becoming dead is irrelevant. On an INT call, we even suspend and rule on the location of the ball at the time of the INT and regardless of where the ball goes, its status does not change.

Why would I kill the ball? There hasn't been any interference yet because interference requires a play and we all agree there's no play to interfere with yet. Since the ball isn't dead subsequent events do matter.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by youngump

Why would I kill the ball? There hasn't been any interference yet because interference requires a play and we all agree there's no play to interfere with yet. Since the ball isn't dead subsequent events do matter.

Am active runner can be picked off at a base or try to advance.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by youngump

Why would I kill the ball? There hasn't been any interference yet because interference requires a play and we all agree there's no play to interfere with yet. Since the ball isn't dead subsequent events do matter.

I believe 8.6.13 covers that. As I read the OP, F3 was executing an immediate act of making a play on the BR and the effect includes an immediate dead ball.

As previously noted, it can be a stretch, but I believe this to be the closest rule in providing guidance to the umpire for this situation.