Interference after an error...
 

Can a runner be called for interference with a fielder after the fielder just made an error and is in the process to recover the ball?

Batter hits a pop up down the first base line, pitcher goes to catch it in fair territory and misses it. now takes first or second step to get ball in foul territory and runner collides with pitcher.

Speaking ASA.......yes.........(giving Mike his $0.02 cents).

As long as that fielder in the opinion of the umpire has a chance to make an out..............Interference can be called.

A runner (or batter runner) may not inerfere with a fielder attempting a legitimate play on the ball.

The only instance I know of where this may be considered a "train wreck".....is on a ball hit directly in front of the plate and the catcher and runner both tangle up when they are both trying to do what is expected of them.

This particular play is now outlined specifically in the ASA umpires handbook. Prior to that it was known as the war of 1999.................grin

Joel

Special Guest Appearance :) :cool:

That's what I am thinking!

Hmmmm .
So then the runner is legitamatley running and because of an error by the fielder pushing the ball infront of them and trying to recover it we penalise the runner ?
No way !
If the runner intentionally interferes yes but otherwise I would have OBST

Is the ball not still a batted ball? And is the fielder not in the process of fielding a batted ball? By NFHS rules the runner is out for interfering.

Or other rules on the step-and-reach principle.

Man.........this is a tough crowd............... d;-)

I wish I could come more often, but work and other obligations have been paramount.

Debeau........a fielder still must be given a legitimate shot at fielding the ball. If they kick it 10 feet towards the pitcher...........to me they have lost their protction. However..........think of an awesome F6 who keeps a line shot in front of them and takes it off the chest...........it drops 2 feet in front of them.........and just when they are ready to glove the ball........they get mowed down by R2...........

I have interference.

You have to give a fielder some level of protection............even if they had the opportunity to field the ball.

JMHO.

Joel

After it hits a fielder or is played at then it is no longer a batted ball .
You would then be rewarding a player for making a mistake .
Cant be such an awesome fielder if the cant glove it .
F6 misfields the ball and pushes it into a runners path who accidentally kicks it , so we have dead ball intereference or misfield and fielder dives to regather but dives into a runner , another intereference .
NO the fielder has had their chance .

Where do you find the definition that a batted ball is no longer a batted ball when it hits a fielder or is played at?

Let's try ASA 8-4.F, where it says that after a ball has been touched by an infielder, interference must be intentional. There is no "step and reach" interpretation in ASA; once touched, it is not interference unless judged intentional, either running into the batted ball or the fielder.

This has often been misstated to mean only deflected by another infielder; not so stated. It covers missplays, bobbles, boots, by the same fielder, as well.

Try 8.7.J and POE 33.

Do you say that step-and-reach does not apply in other rules as well?

Looking at NFHS 8-8-6 (in 2005), I don't see how you can rule interference. I read "Runner is not out when.. A runner is hit with a fair batted ball after it touches, or is touched by, any fielder, including the pitcher, and the runner could not avoid contact with the ball." Similar to the ASA rule, this absolutely does not preclude the infielder attempting to play her own bobble; it is touched, therefore contact must be avoidable (translate intentional) to rule the runner out. I know WMB has stated the "step and reach" theory, and I seem to recall he had it from an NFHS Rules member, but I just don't see how any interpretation can, absent specific ruling, contradict another specific ruling.

NCAA has no such similar rule. In their wording, only if no "other" fielder has no chance for a "play" is it not an out. Therefore, we must presume that means the same fielder is protected if she still has a play, too; and the "step and reach" theory seems to be the only one out there.

The rule you cite is a batted ball hitting a runner. The OP was a runner colliding with the fielder. NFHS 8-6-10 says runner is out if runner interferes with a fielder attempting to field a batted ball. The definition of a batted ball does not state the point at which a batted ball is no longer a batted ball.