Interference after an error...

[jonesmael]

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.

[Gulf Coast Blue]

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

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by Gulf Coast Blue

Joel

Special Guest Appearance

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

Special Guest Appearance

That's what I am thinking!

[debeau]

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

[Smiley]

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.

[rodan55]

Originally Posted by jonesmael

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.

This has to do with the same player who booted the ball making the play, I still think when this came up in the clinic, it was considered as the defense making a play and interference on the runner. Now, if it is off a fielder to another player as the casebook states, then yes it has to be intentional.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by rodan55

This has to do with the same player who booted the ball making the play, I still think when this came up in the clinic, it was considered as the defense making a play and interference on the runner. Now, if it is off a fielder to another player as the casebook states, then yes it has to be intentional.

However, 8-7-J-4 says "any defensive player" this includes the one who booted the ball. I realize the case play indicates another fielder, however, the case book doesn't provide examples of all possible plays. I don't believe ASA makes a distinction. At least it doesn't in the wording of rule 8-7-J-4. Was this a national clinic or a local one? If this is what ASA wants, then I'll change my position. However, based on the wording of rule 8-7-J-4 I see no difference between the fielder who booted the ball and another fielder. I can't see penalizing the offense for a defensive mistake unless the offense intentionally interfered.

The problem is we have two rules that conflict with each other and the rulebook does not clearly delineate which one takes precedence.

[rodan55]

Originally Posted by rwest

However, 8-7-J-4 says "any defensive player" this includes the one who booted the ball. I realize the case play indicates another fielder, however, the case book doesn't provide examples of all possible plays. I don't believe ASA makes a distinction. At least it doesn't in the wording of rule 8-7-J-4. Was this a national clinic or a local one? If this is what ASA wants, then I'll change my position. However, based on the wording of rule 8-7-J-4 I see no difference between the fielder who booted the ball and another fielder. I can't see penalizing the offense for a defensive mistake unless the offense intentionally interfered.

The problem is we have two rules that conflict with each other and the rulebook does not clearly delineate which one takes precedence.

National staff.

Response from Dave Epperson in Kansas,

Yes, as long as any defensive player has the possibility of getting an out.
Yes, the runner is responsible for not interfering, to and include running out of the baseline to avoid contact.