With 1 out, R1 is on 3rd and R2 is on 1st. B4 hits a high fly ball over fair territory, which F4 is under, ready to catch. R1 ran on contact, not realizing it was a fly ball, and crosses home plate while the ball is in flight. R2 realizes that F4 will turn an easy double play if the ball is caught, and interferes with the catch, so that F4 is unable to catch the ball.

Since the inteference rule returns runners to bases at the time of interference, R1 would score on this play, having crossed the plate prior to the act of interference. The ball was not caught, so there is no available appeal.

However, the BR is also declared out for the act of interference, and no run can score when the BR doesn't reach first base, no?

Two responses.

One, the BR didn't commit any act of interference; R2 did. R2 is out, and BR is awarded first base, UNLESS the umpire judges an intentional act of interference. So, not an automatic ruling; and many players could make the interference look unintentional, or at least put intent in doubt.

Two, to prove the original question, even if you add the judgment of intentional interference, simply change the play to no outs. R1 scores when there is interference on a fly ball.

Steve, INT on a fly ball, fair OR foul results in the runner AND the BR being declared out.

Yes, this would be the stickler. Granted that would have to be one speedster on third or the ball was it a mile high.

Whether or not a run scores before an act of interference is not an issue, IMO. The issue is did the offense benefit from the INT (e.g. a run scores that otherwise would not have - see the other thread on a runner using an act of INT to prevent being forced out).

Provide rules support for this statement. I don't believe it is true 100% of the time.


It's only 60 feet. Quick runners can cover that distance in 3.8 to 4.1 seconds. I'm short, fat, and slow and I think I can do it in under 5.0 seconds. :eek: :D :p

ASA: 8-7-j.

This sitch was specifically covered in this year's and last year's NUS. If the BR interferes with the defense's ability to catch a fly ball (in fair or foul territory), the ball is immediately dead, and only the BR is out. All runners must return.

What if it isn't an attempt to prevent a double play?

I don't think Big Slick was referring to the BR interferring, I think he was talking about a runner interferring on a fly ball.

Yes, I am referring to INT by a runner on a fly ball. I don't have my rule book at work, had to make a phone call for the rule reference. I believe there is a note that states: "On a fly ball, fair or foul, the batter runner shall also be called out." The latter part of the rule was added circa 2001. Only rule code to carry the foul ball provision.

Y'all need to "turn the page" and read the EXCEPTION to 8.7.J-L.NOTE.

Actually, I believe we discussed this play quite a while back AND it was also discussed by the NUS.

Ya mean dis one?

And here I thought you had plenty of oxygen up your way. Guess I was wrong.

I clearly noted the 'EXCEPTION' which would be the next paragraph, COACH!