Immediate (?) dead ball

[WestMichBlue]

When two fielders are in the area of a play, interference call be called only when the runner interferres on the fielder you judge to be able to make the play. But how long do you wait to make that judgment?

Situation: R1 on 1B, high fly ball on the right side of the infield. F1, F3, F4 can potentially make the catch; even F9 if the ball drifts further out.

R1, off the base, takes a couple steps back to 1B and collides with F3 who has taken a couple steps towards the ball. Normally you would kill the ball at the time of contact. But in this case the ball is still high in the air and you don't know who is going to catch it. How long will you wait?

Call it immediately - and watch F4 make the catch with ease. Now you've taken speedy Sally off the bases and placed big Bertha at 1B and the O Coach is very unhappy with you.

Wait and watch the ball drift towards 1B and drop to the ground because F4 doesn't get there, and F3 is slowed because of the collision. Now do you have interference? O Coach is on you for obstruction because F4 picked up the ball and forced R1 at 2B?

WMB

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by WestMichBlue

Situation: R1 on 1B, high fly ball on the right side of the infield. F1, F3, F4 can potentially make the catch; even F9 if the ball drifts further out.

R1, off the base, takes a couple steps back to 1B and collides with F3 who has taken a couple steps towards the ball. Normally you would kill the ball at the time of contact. But in this case the ball is still high in the air and you don't know who is going to catch it. How long will you wait?

That's why we get the big bucks. Quick survey of the fielders involved and make the call, interference (DB) or obstruction (DDB) immediately. Remember, if it is interference, the ball is considered dead at that point.

Where it drifts becomes irrelevant.

[FUBLUE]

That's a tough call...reminds me of my coaching days.

Similar situation...but tying run is on 3rd. Top 7, 2 outs, R1 at 3B, R2 at 1B. High pop up to "the bermuda triangle" between F3, F4 and F9. Would have been great play for anyone to catch it. IMHO, F9 had best chance at it. F3 collides with R2 about 10 feet off of base...actually pushes her down. Ball hits ground, F9 takes 3-4 steps, picks up the ball and is throwing to home (why not second, have no idea) when BU (from behind, literally about 20 feet behind 3B) calls interference. Game over. BTW, R1 had already crossed the plate and was in the dugout when he called interference.

I, in being my humble self, told him what I thought of his call because:

1. He had not angle on the call.
2. He waited WAY too long to call it.
3. He made the mistake of telling me he wasn't playing extra innings for a second game today.

He ejected me, but after his little dance, I informed him that the game was over, I couldn't be ejected...and he turned and walked away.

He ejected me the next game...and I deserved that one. (But we did get to go home early since we were already down 20 in the second inning).

Long story short, call what you see, call it and sell it. Even if you're wrong, sell it and sell it big. And he didn't sell it..it was the weakest interference call I have ever seen... (Image a mumbled "dead ball, interefence, batter out"--that's what he said--with arms raised about to the beltline)

[Edited by FUBLUE on Jun 30th, 2004 at 11:52 AM]

[SC Ump]

Originally posted by WestMichBlue
...Call it immediately - and watch F4 make the catch with ease...

When I see a strike, I hesitate a moment, replay it in my mind and make sure it was really a strike before I call it.

When I have a tag at home, I see the tag and am sure I have a tag, but I don't call an out until I see that the defensive player has held onto the ball properly, even if that means I delay my call for quite some time (usually while I'm yelling, "Show me the ball, show me the ball.)

When I have interference, I see the play immediately and I know the ruling is immediate and that the ball is dead immediately, but I will often hesitate and not call it immediately, just to make sure what I saw is really what I saw. However, like the two other situations above, if I delay too long, it appears that I am not in the game and not on top of the situation.

But definitely a HTBT.

[DownTownTonyBrown]

What if you call the interference and F3 catches it anyway... then the runner didn't really interfere.

There is no real reason to hurry the call. Take note of where runners are and then IF YOU NEED to make an interference call, you can place runners at the correct positions on the bases.

Just like others have pointed out - wait and see as much of the play as you can before a call needs to be made. I guess the way to say this is SEE THAT THE COLLISION HAS AFFECTED THE PLAY, then make the necessary call. That could mean immediately or it could mean another second of waiting.

[Edited by DownTownTonyBrown on Jun 30th, 2004 at 07:42 PM]

[SamNVa]

Originally posted by DownTownTonyBrown
What if you call the interference and F3 catches it anyway... then the runner didn't really interfere.

There is no real reason to hurry the call. Take note of where runners are and then IF YOU NEED to make an interference call, you can place runners at the correct positions on the bases.

Just like others have pointed out - wait and see as much of the play as you can before a call needs to be made. I guess the way to say this is SEE THAT THE COLLISION HAS AFFECTED THE PLAY, then make the necessary call. That could mean immediately or it could mean another second of waiting.

[Edited by DownTownTonyBrown on Jun 30th, 2004 at 07:42 PM]

I TOTALLY DISAGREE with the idea of waiting to see if the "interference" had any effect on the play. Suppose. F9 comes over and attempts a diving catch, but just misses the ball, are you then going to call interference on R1? If you do, you are in for some serious face time with the O-manager.

Interference MUST always be an immediate call. If a runner and a fielder get tangled up, you must decide AT THAT MOMENT whether that fielder has the best chance to make a play on the ball, and either call the interference immediately or not.

SamC

[WestMichBlue]

May Issue of Referee - softball Caseplays. They say that because it is a high fly ball you can not make an immediate decision as to who may catch the ball, thus you don't know who to protect from interference.

If you have a collision between a runner and fielder during this decision period, then you can not have interference because that fielder is not protected.

Obstruction is a stretch, so they advise for "no call." Use safe call to tell everyone you saw the collision, "but neither player was placed at a disavantage not intended by the spirit of the rules."

WMB

[SC Ump]

Originally posted by SamNVa
... Suppose. F9 comes over and attempts a diving catch, but just misses the ball, are you then going to call interference on R1? If you do, you are in for some serious face time with the O-manager....

"Coach, if your player had not interfered, F9 would not have had to attempt a diving catch."

But, I also agree with with WestMichBlue stated.

[SamNVa]

I have no problem with a nocall in this situation. I was just saying that you cannot wait to see the results of the play and then call interferebce as DTTB was suggesting. I reiterate, whenever a fielder and a runner get tangled up in the vicinity of batted ball, you must make an immediate call of either INT, or OBS, or in the rare case that WMB presented, a Play On/safe signal, but whatever you call it must be done immediately and no changing your mind afterwards.

TMHO,
SamC

[Dakota]

Originally posted by WestMichBlue
May Issue of Referee - softball Caseplays.

This interpretation may be correct (even a blind squirrel, etc.) but I don't consider Referee mag to be an authoritative source on softball. They dropped softball a few years ago because it was not considered by them to be a real sport (or some such elitist reason). I guess they only added it back in after they found out through howls of protest and cancelled subscriptions how many of their readers were softball officials. Who was the author of the article?

[CecilOne]

There certainly is some skepticism about interps in a magazine rather than from a rules committee, unless that's who wrote it. But it is often good thinking that we have to match up with our specific code rules knowledge before using it.

BTW, I continue to disagree with interpreting and applying rules based on coaches' reactions, player tantrums, length of game, future assignments and certainly not on crowd (mob)reaction.