Another Hi-Jacked Play

[whiskers_ump]

NFHS Play:

With a runner at first and a batter hits a ground ball to the infield and the batter runner gets thrown out at first with a bit of a wreck and the batter runner holds the 1st baseman down.
The runner has initially advanced to 2nd now to third .
Easy solution . Dead ball interference runner closest to home is also out? (Not my answer, poster supplied)

However, is it the same call if the runner sits on 2nd and has no intention of moving to 3rd .Also after the wreck there was no chance of throwing the runner out at 2nd.

[JEL]

Don't have my FED books here at the moment, but I believe umpire judgement would come into play. If the INT prevented a possible DP, the second out can be called.

[debeau]

Thanks for the hi-jack .I recently joined this forum and am from New Zealand .
It was on a game I recently officiated on .
This is ISF rules by the way .
I was first base umpire on a 4 man team .
I called the batter runner out but not the interference .The 2nd base umpire called the interference .
My explanation to the crew chief in the post game was that I saw the holding down but couldnt call the interference as I didnt know what the runner was doing ie moving to third or sitting on 2nd .
My understanding of the interference rule was that it only applies when there is an opportunity to make a play so no movement no interference .
The explanation I was given was " a wider picture " That interference is the when a offensive player prevents hinders or confuses a defensive player making a play .
As the 1st baseman was held down he was prevented therefore interference .
I am still not convinced as I dont think this was the intent of the rule .

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by debeau
Thanks for the hi-jack .I recently joined this forum and am from New Zealand .
It was on a game I recently officiated on .
This is ISF rules by the way .
I was first base umpire on a 4 man team .
I called the batter runner out but not the interference .The 2nd base umpire called the interference .
My explanation to the crew chief in the post game was that I saw the holding down but couldnt call the interference as I didnt know what the runner was doing ie moving to third or sitting on 2nd .
My understanding of the interference rule was that it only applies when there is an opportunity to make a play so no movement no interference .
The explanation I was given was " a wider picture " That interference is the when a offensive player prevents hinders or confuses a defensive player making a play .
As the 1st baseman was held down he was prevented therefore interference .
I am still not convinced as I dont think this was the intent of the rule .

If it is obvious the offensive player is holding F3, kill the play. After that, you can sort out any additional outs or placement of runners. If the umpire on 3rd just sees a routine out, THEY may not realize there is an INT call. If there is an INT call, your partners will need to have that information to check the runner's position.

[debeau]

I like that last answer .
Kill the play for two reasons .
1 If there is interference and a need to put the runner closest to home out .
2 To prevent any dust up between 1st base and the batter runner .
I should point out this is mens fast pitch at the top level so it is pretty intense competition .

[whiskers_ump]

Originally posted by whiskers_ump
NFHS Play:

With a runner at first and a batter hits a ground ball to the infield and the batter runner gets thrown out at first with a bit of a wreck and the batter runner holds the 1st baseman down.
The runner has initially advanced to 2nd now to third .
Easy solution . Dead ball interference runner closest to home is also out? (Not my answer, poster supplied)

However, is it the same call if the runner sits on 2nd and has no intention of moving to 3rd .Also after the wreck there was no chance of throwing the runner out at 2nd.

Part 1: Realizing that this is a HTBT play, I cannot see intent; especially since the play involved a *wreck*. Most *wrecks* involved bodies getting tangled. (Did the BR intentionally pin the defender down?) Did the defender have a play on R1 advancing to 3rd? If so, good call.
____________________________________
Part 2: No, there would obviously not be another play if runner is not attempting to advance. Therefore, no 2nd out on the play.

[debeau]

After further discussion with my colleagues ( two IFS umpires ) which doesnt mean they are right but certainly adds weight to their discussion .
If a player after being called out causes interference then the runner closest to home is out .
The player causing the interference has no idea what the runner is doing so has erred against the rules to prevent a further play . The fielder who has been held down has no choice to a play , they cant move .
Punish the offensive player hard by the second out .
They wont do it again .