INT or not?
 

Situation: With no outs, R1 on 3B and R2 on 2B, B3 hits a ground ball to F5, who deflects the batted ball toward F6. While attempting to field the deflected batted ball, F6 collides with R2 who is advancing toward 3B.

What's your call?

Edited: ASA Rules

Ruleset? x

Depends on rule set and my judgment. IOW, there is no standard cookie cutter answer to this one without more information.

The wording sounds very much like that of a question from an ASA test of a couple of years ago. The answer was no interference.

But you have to see it. "F6 collides with R2" appears to indicate that it was more the fielder chasing the ball and running into the runner than vice versa. If the fielder was stationary in trying to field the deflected ball and the runner then ran into the fielder, that would probably be considered avoidable and would qualify as interference. It's a HTBT.

Edited to include rule set clarification: ASA.

This was one of the examples used for this year's Fed presentation. In Fed ball, it's obstruction. And, with F6 colliding with the runner, you're going to have a problem in ASA having anything other than obstruction.

Why would there be a problem with calling INT on R2? - F6 is attempting to field a batted ball, and is considered to be making a play, per this year's addition to Rule 1 of the "play" definition.

No, F6 is attempting to field a deflected batted ball
 

Interference on the runner has to be intentional, even with this years changes, on a deflected ball.

Looking for a citation that reflects this.

Rule 8-7-J-4
 

See title for reference

From the way the situation is presented--I would have no problem
banging the runner out for interference---the fielder was making
a play on a ball--deflected or not. Thev runner must avoid contact.
At least that is what is in the mind-set of this high schoool umpire
with the recent Federation parameters !

The runners job is to run to the next base. The runner cannot be expected to know a ball changed direction or have eyes in the back of their heads.

The ONLY way I can call this INT is if, in my judgment, the runner actually did something to cause the INT.

Exactly
 

In my opinion, that is why ASA requires intent here. But can there be obstruction? Doesn't the fielder still have a right to field the ball? Does the fact that the ball was deflected change the status of the ball from a batted ball to a deflected ball and does that mean that the fielder loses their protection? In the definition of obstruction it mentions two actions a fielder can commit that prevents the obstruction call:

1. Be in possession of the ball
2. Be in the act of fielding a BATTED BALL.

It doesn't mention a deflected ball. Are they still protected?

Could this be just a train wreck and a live ball or do we have to get either obstruction or interference?

Thanks rwest. Shaking the rust off.

From the '07 ASA UIC National Meeting presentation on INT/OBS that I stole the question from, here's the ruling:

Ruling: If, in the umpire's judgement, R2 intentionally interfered with F6 playing the batted ball, R2 would be ruled out for interference. The ball is dead, R1 is returned to the last base touched at the time of interference and B3 is awarded 1B. On the other hand, if the umpire did not believe the contact to be intentional, this would be a "no call" and play continues.

So to use this and answer your last question: Train wreck. I was just shaking off the rust regarding differences between misplayed and deflected balls and runners subsequently contacting fielders making plays on said balls.

ASA: Deflected batted ball, interference must be intentional.

NCAA: Ricochet batted ball, interference must be intentional.

NFHS 2007: Initial Play rule does not include a subsequent fielder attempting to field a batted ground ball. Therefore no protection from interference.

In all three rule sets; if a batted ball touches F5 and rolls towards F6, and in attempting to field the ball F6 makes contact with R1, obstruction is the call. (Unless you somehow think that R1 deliberately ran into F6.)

Differences:

In ASA and NCAA if the ball bounds off F1, the same rules apply.

In NFHS, if a fielder is attempting to field a ball touched by F1 they are still making an Initial Play, thus are protected against interference.

In ASA and NCAA, if a line drive bounced off F5 into the air, the same rules apply.

In NFHS, if a line drive bounced off F5 into the air and F6 had a chance to make an out (catch a fly ball) then F6 is making an Initial Play and is protected against interference.

Clear as mud?

WMB

I see your logic, but the 2007 ASA PowerPoint I just quoted disagrees with that statement. It states that there is no call either way, under ASA rules (absent intent from either player).

I can't see how this could be correct. I understand that where you got it is about as credible source as possible, but surely this is a mistake. If the fielder is protected (as in a batted, non-deflected ball), then the runner has the obligation to avoid the fielder. Easy. If the fielder is NOT protected (as in the OP), then the fielder has an obligation to not be in the runner's basepath - period. No exception for chasing a deflected ball or errant throw or anything listed in the rulebook. I don't see any "train wreck" situation in the book at all other than the grounder being fielded right in front of the box by the catcher.

This is clear cut in NFHS: Obstruction.

What is clear? You have multiple options with different answers.

Assuming contact between a runner and fielder:

1. If the fielder bobbles the ball and is within a step and a reach of the ball, the call is interference.

2. If the fielder bobbles the ball and has taken three steps to retrieve it, the call is obstruction.

3. If a batted ground ball deflects off the pitcher and another fielder attempts to field it, the call is interference.

4. If a batted ground ball deflects of another fielder, and a second fielder move to field it, the call is obstruction.

5. If a batted ball in the air deflects off any fielder and a second fieder moves to catch it, the call is interference.

So in five situations we have two obstruction calls and three interference calls. Of course, any deliberate action by a runner will over-rule obstruction.

WMB

Agree. But the OP is your situation #4, so in NFHS, OBSTRUCTION is the call.