Is there such a thing?

Saw a play this weekend where a runner was attempting to
steal third, batter hits a hard grounder to SS, who bobbles
the ball when the runner passes in front of her. Blue called
interference, runner out.

Personally, I don't think it fall into ASA's visual interference
category. Merely running in front of the runner without any action
whatever.

Yes, I've seen this before and heard a bundle of justification arguments, none of which wash.

There is no rule prohibiting a player from running between a batted ball and fielder.

Excluding any other cause for interference, the runner must commit an ACT of interference and simply running to the next base does not qualify.

Could be a softball/baseball umpire. I know, that word shouldn't be used here but, in Fed baseball it is interference to pass between the ball and the fielder. The runner would be out. Perhaps this umpire brought that rule with him to the softball field.

<b>Fed baseball it is interference to pass between the ball and the fielder.</b>

It is?

Must be a different Fed than we use, Greymule.
Russian Fed, maybe?

Yes. It was. Maybe they changed it since I last worked Fed bseball, like so many other things. But who says this guy kept up with the changes also.

woolnojg,

So what you are saying is if the SS is playing deep because
the batter is a real slugger, hits a ground ball towards the SS
and the runner from second passes in front of him, because he could
not go behind, could, but that would put him in left field,
then the runner must stop and wait for the SS to play the
ball, or be called out of interference. Since by your state-
ment <b>in Fed baseball it is interference to pass between the ball
and the fielder.</b> Hmmmmm.:confused: :rolleyes:

And you all wonder why I have a problem with that game being cited on this board :D

I was thinking exactly the same thing, but in a rare case of keeping my fingers off the keyboard :cool: I let it go.

And Mike, I thought your objection had at least a little to do with certain personalities involved in the game! ;)

Taken to its logical extremes, yes. The ball would have to pass in front of the runner or the runner would have to go behind the fielder.
In practice, not so extreme. Hot shots will beat the runner to the position anyway. Slow rollers, the runner would have to yield to the fielder. If there is a sufficient gap between the runner passing through the spot then the ball, not a problem or a call.

I know, next question up is "What's a sufficient gap?". Umpires judgement, that's why you get the big bucks, right ;-).


And before youget to ragging all over the answer, the original question was along the lines of " Where the h*** did he get that rule?". Just a possibility of where it came from. Or he could have just made it up.

The umpire in question never worked a BB game in his life.

Personally, I just felt it was bad judgment...The guy is a
good umpire. He does do a lot of ASA. ASA does include visual
distraction under Interference in POE #33. Although in the case
I posted, it was merely a matter of a runner passing in front of
a fielder doing nothing more than advancing to the next base.

Say that reminds me.....

When I used to be down in scottk_61's territory, they had this park near the nudie joints (Hanley Rd?) On Tuesday nights, the Odyssey 2001 Club had a team made up of owners, bartenders and bouncers. Quite often there were dancers there to cheer the team on.

These ladies seem to enjoy trying to make the other team miss fielding the ball by flashing their tops. I know I missed quite a few calls, but I always volunteered to fill in when Scott needed extra umpires.

Well,I'd say that makes a lot more sense than Woolnojg's "interp".

Woolnojg. You are off base with this for any softball code or baseball code I have been involved with.

It it is not a Fed BB interp that has been used in the past 18 years.

Roger Greene

Sorry Roger,
It was a rule, not an interp. And it was Fed only. But, it was at least 10 years ago.

Can you provide the rule cite?