Retired runner INT?

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by robbie

One still has to interfere for there to be interference. Being hit by a thrown ball cannot be deemed interference in itself.

I agree that not every time that a retired runner is hit by a thrown ball, it is interference. A runner who just scored is heading to the dugout, and the ball is thrown over F1's head in the circle and hits that runner while she's just about to enter the dugout. Yeah, that's not going to get an interference call from me.

But being hit by a thrown ball that directly prevents a potential play by the defense is gonna be interference, whether the retired runner did something intentional or not. You cannot offer to the defensive head coach, "Well, the retired runner didn't intend to get hit by that throw." Again, intent is not relevant.

Here's another one in the realm of the possibility. R1 at third and R2 at first. Batter bunts the ball back to F1, and there's no play to be made on R1, so F1 throws the BR out. R2 never hesitates on her way from first to third, and F3 throws to F5, but the ball is in the dirt and trickles away from F5. R2 gets up from her slide and tries to score as F5 chases the ball down.

R1 who already scored was on her way to the third base dugout when she realized the bat was still near home, so she turns back to get it. She's oblivious to the fact that her teammate is trying to score. She picks up the bat and starts to head to the dugout, and puts herself right in the path of F5's throw home to play on R2. The ball hits R1 in the helmet.

Intent? No. Interference? Absolutely.