Second guessing

[rwest]

Originally Posted by UmpireErnie

I am having a severe case of second guessing on a play I had tonight.

I was working one man in a Little League Junior Division (ages 13-14) softball game. Bottom of the third, home team is up twenty-something to zero. Bases loaded, nobody out. B4 hits a slow roller to F1. The visiting team parents are going nuts. “Throw it home, throw it home!” I am praying to the Softball Gods that F1 throws it to somebody and gets an out, any out!

F1 fumbles with the ball for a moment, then starts running toward home plate with the ball, then finally decides to toss the ball underhanded to F2. F2 has a position behind home plate with her foot on the back point of home plate and her glove hand outstretched over the plate to receive the ball. Frankly, I doubt if F2 had a clue whether or not she needed to tag the advancing runner or not.

R1 from 3B coming home stays on her feet and is about to touch home as F2 is receiving the ball. R1 makes contact with F2s arm. F2 steps back as her arm is contacted by R1. The ball falls to the ground.

During the second from the time the play happened until I made my call I remember thinking “the runner has to avoid contact” and “defense had an opportunity to make an out” as R1 would have been forced out if F2 makes the catch. I called dead ball and ruled R1 out for interference. BR to 1B, everyone else forced up a base, one out.

Nobody argued.

In hindsight, a runner must avoid contact with a fielder who is fielding a batted ball, or a fielder who is holding the ball waiting to apply a tag. But interference with a thrown ball requires intent on the part of the runner. This fielder was in the act of catching a thrown ball. The runner made no action to show intent to interfere with the catch, she simply ran toward and through home. F2s arm was in her path.

It’s not obstruction, as R1 certainly never altered her path. But I don’t think it was interference either. I think it was incidental contact and F2 better pick up the ball.

It is true that interference has to be intentional with a thrown ball, however, that's not what happened in this case, if I understand the play correctly. R1 did not interfere with the ball, but with the catcher's ability to catch the ball. There is a big difference. R1 interfered with the catcher - OUT! Also keep in mind that the catcher is in the act of fielding a thrown ball. A runner can not interfere with a fielder in this situation. I think you got it right. At least until Mike says you got it wrong, then I agree with Mike.