inteference by batter or not?

[Dakota]

Originally posted by Roger Greene
it seems that the burden to avoid interference would shift to the retired BR when F2 is making a legitimate play on another runner.

Logically, that would seem to make sense. The problem with ASA is defining the legal status of the player running to 1B.

In ASA, interference with a thrown ball by a runner, retired runner, batter-runner, or batter must be intentional. An on-deck batter may not interfere with a thrown ball, intentional or not. This player, however, is none of these.

Blocked ball doesn't seem to apply, since the person contacting the thrown ball is definitely engaged in the game.

I could support applying the rule for a retired runner and / or a batter out of the box, and defend that application by citing rule 10-1.

Originally posted by Roger Greene
Is your position that either the no call or interference could be supported if the attempt is to retire a runner returning to first or stealing to another base?

Yes, but my position is for the interference call, the umpire would have to judge intentional interference. In ASA, no-call would be the "expected" call, I think.