|
|||
Interference/Lunch Bet
Need help settling this, NFHS.
R1 on 2nd. Ball hit to F4, play at 1st BR out with plenty of time to not run into F3. F3 has blocked most of the base and BR plows into her hard. Interference call is made. R1 has rounded 3rd at the time of the interference call. Question is R1 alway called out, or just returned to third and possibly called out based on the umpires judgment on whether the defense had a play on her. I haven't looked this up as my books are at home. But I have the lead runner out on interference since the interference occurred after the BR was already out. The guy, I believe that is buying lunch says that the 2nd out is a judgment call. |
|
|||
I can't speak for NFHS, but in ASA, if there's no possible play on R1, there's no INT call. If, as a result of F3 being down on the ground, R1 advances to HP, then you would have INT.
I can't imagine NFHS would be that different from ASA, but seeing as how I don't call NFHS, I'll let the NFHS guys confirm it.
__________________
Dave I haven't decided if I should call it from the dugout or the outfield. Apparently, both have really great views! Screw green, it ain't easy being blue! I won't be coming here that much anymore. I might check in now and again. |
|
|||
Quote:
Softball Rules Book 2007 Rule 8: Batter-Runner and Runner Section 6: The Runner Is Out Article 18 Art. 18... After being declared out or after scoring, a runner intentionally interferes with a defensive player's opportunity to make a play on another runner. A runner continuing to run and drawing a throw may be considered a form of interference. This does not apply to the batter-runner running on the dropped third strike rule. PENTALTY: (Arts. 16, 17, 18) The ball is dead and the runner closest to home plate at the time of the interference shall be declared out. Each other runner must return to the last base legally touched at the time of the interference. I think the keys are 'INTENTIONALLY' and 'OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A PLAY'. Probably a HTBT. But, to answer your question, no R1 is not always called out. Some thinking, common sense, and umpire judgement are going to have to come into play.
__________________
Mark NFHS, NCAA, NAFA "If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?" Anton Chigurh - "No Country for Old Men" |
|
|||
Quote:
Speaking NFHS, you must ask yourself if the "interference" prevented a play on another runner, as you have already been directed my Mark above. If there is no play, then you have nothing else, except maybe a DQ'ed player if you feel the contact was flagrant and unsportsmanlike. If there was the possibility of a play, in your judgement, on another player, then the player closest to home would be called out. Who's buying lunch now?
__________________
Scott It's a small world, but I wouldn't want to have to paint it. |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Scott It's a small world, but I wouldn't want to have to paint it. |
|
|||
I think that I am getting the free lunch.
This scenario happened in one of my daughters HS games last May. My daughter was the girl rounding third at the time of the interference. The interference did prevent the play on my daughter at home, so she should have been out as well. The umpire never killed the play on the interference call, and my daughter scored. They didn't put her on third or call her out! My view was she was out automatically as the play was prevented. To top it off the opposing coach never complained. My bet over lunch was, is she out automatically as the play was prevented or can the umpire judge whether she would have been out if the play was made. This isn't clear in the OP. Last edited by tmielke; Tue Oct 02, 2007 at 11:55am. |
|
|||
The answer to your specific question is she is out automatically if the umpire judges there was a chance to make a play on the (any other) runner. As the rule was quoted it is interference on the chance to make a play on another runner, NOT the chance to get an out on the other runner. So if there is judgement that the fielder had a chance to throw home to make a play on R1 then she is out whether it was likely there would have been an actual out on R1 or not.
|
|
|||
8.6.18 in NFHS Case book situations A & B do not deal with "intentional" interference by base runner.
Sit. A...R1 on 3rd. B2 hits to SS who throws home. Catcher can't make play and R1 scores. Catcher then tries to throw to 2nd to get B2 out. R1 runs into Catcher "after R1 has crossed plate causing her to drop the ball". Ruling runs scores..if umpire judgement says the interference prevented B2 from being put out the umpire will call her out. Sit. B also states it is umpires judgement on a non-intentional interference. NFHS (and ASA for that matter) is contradicting itself. In my not so honorable opinion, NFHS should take the guess work out and make the runner closest to home out if retired runner or runner who already scored interferes PERIOD. ASA took out the intentional part of the rule as should NFHS. |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
Hope that clears up what I meant to say. |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Scott It's a small world, but I wouldn't want to have to paint it. |
|
|||
Quote:
|
Bookmarks |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Interference? | tzme415 | Softball | 4 | Mon Jan 30, 2006 09:33pm |
Runner interference versus umpire interference | Jay R | Baseball | 1 | Thu Apr 28, 2005 07:00pm |
Interference? | DownTownTonyBrown | Softball | 17 | Mon Mar 31, 2003 06:22pm |
interference | refjef40 | Softball | 12 | Fri Mar 21, 2003 09:31am |
Interference | Larry | Softball | 5 | Thu Jun 06, 2002 09:31am |