On-Deck Batter interferes with ball four

[John Robertson]

Here's one that happened tonight:

Runner on third base. Batter up with a 3-0 count. Pitch comes in low for ball four. It bounces off the catcher's shin guard and rolls toward the on-deck batter. The runner at third is not especially fast and cautiously goes about one-third of the way down the line as the catcher chases the ball near the on-deck circle. Just as the catcher goes to pick the ball up, the on-deck batter decides to be "helpful" and kicks the ball towards the catcher!

I called time sent the runner back to third and made the batter-runner go no further than first on the walk. If either the runner at third or the batter-runner had been trying to advance on the play, I would have called the on-deck batter out for interference--which would have been a first for me.

Would anyone have called interference regardless?

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by John Robertson

Here's one that happened tonight:

Runner on third base. Batter up with a 3-0 count. Pitch comes in low for ball four. It bounces off the catcher's shin guard and rolls toward the on-deck batter. The runner at third is not especially fast and cautiously goes about one-third of the way down the line as the catcher chases the ball near the on-deck circle. Just as the catcher goes to pick the ball up, the on-deck batter decides to be "helpful" and kicks the ball towards the catcher!

I called time sent the runner back to third and made the batter-runner go no further than first on the walk. If either the runner at third or the batter-runner had been trying to advance on the play, I would have called the on-deck batter out for interference--which would have been a first for me.

Would anyone have called interference regardless?

You dont call out an on deck batter YOu would call out the runner closest to home on this type of INT. I think you gotta call it here. IF you decided it wasnt INT, I believe you would leave it live.

[John Robertson]

I umpire in Canada. Unless I'm mistaken, the rule of thumb here is to always call out the person who is responsible for creating the interference unless he/she has already scored or been put out. Generally this can't be done if the on-deck hitter is the culprit. This might be splitting hairs, but in this case, because of ball four, could the on-deck batter now be considered the new batter, and thus be called out? Otherwise, I agree that the runner on third would be called out for being the runner closest to the plate.

You see something new every year...

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by John Robertson

I umpire in Canada. Unless I'm mistaken, the rule of thumb here is to always call out the person who is responsible for creating the interference unless he/she has already scored or been put out. Generally this can't be done if the on-deck hitter is the culprit. This might be splitting hairs, but in this case, because of ball four, could the on-deck batter now be considered the new batter, and thus be called out? Otherwise, I agree that the runner on third would be called out for being the runner closest to the plate.

You see something new every year...

No, speaking ASA, the runner closest to home would be ruled out.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by John Robertson

Here's one that happened tonight:

Runner on third base. Batter up with a 3-0 count. Pitch comes in low for ball four. It bounces off the catcher's shin guard and rolls toward the on-deck batter. The runner at third is not especially fast and cautiously goes about one-third of the way down the line as the catcher chases the ball near the on-deck circle. Just as the catcher goes to pick the ball up, the on-deck batter decides to be "helpful" and kicks the ball towards the catcher!

I called time sent the runner back to third and made the batter-runner go no further than first on the walk. If either the runner at third or the batter-runner had been trying to advance on the play, I would have called the on-deck batter out for interference--which would have been a first for me.

Would anyone have called interference regardless?

To be interference, you must judge there was a play. That play may be a runner advancing, that play may be the catcher throwing behind the caitious runner on third. If you think that happened, you should call interference, and the runner closest to home must be out.

On the other hand, if you think there was no play, you cannot have interference; you have a blocked ball (since a live ball was handled and redirected by the offense). Dead ball, and runners return is a valid call, in that situation.

[whiskers_ump]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

To be interference, you must judge there was a play. That play may be a runner advancing, that play may be the catcher throwing behind the caitious runner on third. If you think that happened, you should call interference, and the runner closest to home must be out.

On the other hand, if you think there was no play, you cannot have interference; you have a blocked ball (since a live ball was handled and redirected by the offense). Dead ball, and runners return is a valid call, in that situation.

Agree.

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

On the other hand, if you think there was no play, you cannot have interference; you have a blocked ball (since a live ball was handled and redirected by the offense). Dead ball, and runners return is a valid call, in that situation.

sounds good to me too!

[charliej47]

I've had this happen more than once with the younger players, but never the older ones. I always call the ball dead and don't let anyone advance.

[Scooby]

I though there was a two base award on a blocked ball.

[canump]

Originally Posted by John Robertson

I umpire in Canada. Unless I'm mistaken, the rule of thumb here is to always call out the person who is responsible for creating the interference unless he/she has already scored or been put out. Generally this can't be done if the on-deck hitter is the culprit. This might be splitting hairs, but in this case, because of ball four, could the on-deck batter now be considered the new batter, and thus be called out? Otherwise, I agree that the runner on third would be called out for being the runner closest to the plate.

You see something new every year...

I also umpire in Canada, speaking Canada the runner closet to home would be called out on interference by the on deck batter in your post.

[canump]

Originally Posted by Scooby

I though there was a two base award on a blocked ball.

On a blocked ball created by the offence I don't think so. Dead ball runners return to last base.

[Dholloway1962]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

On the other hand, if you think there was no play, you cannot have interference; you have a blocked ball (since a live ball was handled and redirected by the offense). Dead ball, and runners return is a valid call, in that situation.

In ASA I don't believe there is a dead ball return runner. ASA requires an out on an interference call. Some of the other organizations allow you to return a runner if there isn't a "play", but not ASA.

A blocked ball, in this situation, would only pertain to offensive equipment not in the game wouldn't it? Not the on-deck batter.

I don't have a rule book with me so someone clarify if they can please.

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by Dholloway1962

In ASA I don't believe there is a dead ball return runner. ASA requires an out on an interference call. Some of the other organizations allow you to return a runner if there isn't a "play", but not ASA. I don't have a rule book with me so someone clarify if they can please.

I also dont have a rule book, but Blocked ball by offense stuff/people, which I forgot about initially, you return the runners. Blocked ball is not an INT call (which is an out).

[Dholloway1962]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

I also dont have a rule book, but Blocked ball by offense stuff/people, which I forgot about initially, you return the runners. Blocked ball is not an INT call (which is an out).

I edited my post as you were replying to ask about blocked ball.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by Dholloway1962

...Some of the other organizations allow you to return a runner if there isn't a "play", but not ASA. ...

Of course ASA requires a play for there to be an interference call.

ASA Rule 1

INTERFERENCE: The act of an offensive player or team member, umpire or spectator that impedes, hinders, or confuses a defensive player attempting to execute a play.
Contact is not necessary.