Interference and force out

[CecilOne]

R2 was out before reaching the base he was forced to attain.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

R2 was out before reaching the base he was forced to attain.

Well, let's break this down...

ASA 5-5-B: No run shall be scored if the third out of the inning is the result of:
1. A batter-runner being called out prior to reaching first base or any other runner forced out due to the batter becoming a batter-runner.

Okay... So force out?

ASA 1: Force Out: An out which may be made only when a runner loses the right to the base that the runner is occupying because the batter becomes a batter-runner, and before the batter-runner or a trailing runner has been put out.

He was forced to leave the base, but an out from an act of INT can happen at any time, not just when they're forced.

Anything in the RS?

ASA RS #21: A force out can be made by tagging a runner who is forced to advance to a base as the result of the batter becoming a batter-runner, or by touching the base to which they are being forced.

Still no mention of INT.

Again, common sense tells me that this would be a force out, because they were put out prior to reaching the base they were forced to advance. However, the way in which they were put out has little to nothing to do at all with being forced to advance.

Crap, am I looking at this too much from a coach's perspective?

[cloverdale]

rs#21...key to this rule would be tagging...the intent seems to show me a fielder who can either tag a runner or touch the base...one other thing wouldnt int have presidence over force out ?

[greymule]

My instinct would be that R2's out is a force, and thus R1's run is nullified. But many ASA rulings are counterintuitive. Maybe R2's out is just a generic out, not a force out.

Governing all INT with TOI can create strange situations.

R1 on 3B, no outs. Batter hits a high popup to F3. R1 crosses the plate. BR rounds 1B, collides with F3, and is called out for INT. As far as I can tell, R1's run would count. (Somebody please point out why I'm wrong. I'll sleep better.) The question in the OP makes me wonder whether it would count even if the play began with 2 outs.

[SRW]

Hmm.
8.1.E.4.

Logically, BR gets 1B. R1 is out, R2 returns to last base touched at time of INT (which would be HP)

8.6.E says return runners to the last base at the time of INT.

I can't get from INT to F/O in this... it has all the makings of a timing play to me.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by SRW

Hmm.
8.1.E.4.

Logically, BR gets 1B. R1 is out, R2 returns to last base touched at time of INT (which would be HP)

8.6.E says return runners to the last base at the time of INT.

I can't get from INT to F/O in this... it has all the makings of a timing play to me.

So, if it was the BR who picked up the assumed to be foul ball, you'd still rule the run scores (INT trumps)?

[Andy]

I will side with SRW on this one.

Because of the rulilng that baserunners are returned to the last base achieved at the time of the interference, I'm counting the run.

Tom - your wrinkle provides the need for added thought.

[SRW]

Originally Posted by Dakota

So, if it was the BR who picked up the assumed to be foul ball, you'd still rule the run scores (INT trumps)?

That's a different scenario.

5.5.B: No run shall be scored if the third out of the inning is the result of:
1. A batter-runner being called out prior to reaching first base or any other runner forced out due to the batter becoming a batter-runner. On an appeal play, the force out is determined when the appeal is made, not when the infraction occurred.

In the OP, R2 wasn't "forced out due to the batter becoming a batter-runner", they were declared out on INT. In your sitch, the BR was "called out prior to reaching first base."

I think I'm still holding a timing play in the OP...

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

R2 was out before reaching the base he was forced to attain.

I'm going to second this opinion, and here's why. R2 was forced to vacate 1B and advance to 2B due to B4 becoming a BR. The BR was not called out in this play, so the force is still on. Once R2 touches the ball, that's it, the ball is dead. R2 has now hindered the defense by making contact with a batted ball that has not been touched, nor has it passed any infielder other than the pitcher. R2 should not be allowed to use interference as a advantageous way of taking away a force out. If the runner was put out prior to reaching the base to which they were forced to advance, I'm calling it a force out.

[Tru_in_Blu]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

I'm going to second this opinion, and here's why. R2 was forced to vacate 1B and advance to 2B due to B4 becoming a BR. The BR was not called out in this play, so the force is still on. Once R2 touches the ball, that's it, the ball is dead. R2 has now hindered the defense by making contact with a batted ball that has not been touched, nor has it passed any infielder other than the pitcher. R2 should not be allowed to use interference as a advantageous way of taking away a force out. If the runner was put out prior to reaching the base to which they were forced to advance, I'm calling it a force out.

An out by interference is not a force out. I think ASA is pretty clear on this matter, and yes, there are occasions where an act of INT may be advantageous to the offense. Example: R1 on 3B, R2 on 1B, 1 out. The batter is notoriously slow runner. Infielders are playing behind the runners and batter hits a routine grounder to F4. R2, knowing that this will likely turn into an inning ending DP, times his/her running into the path of the ball which hits him/her. Dead ball, R2 is out, R1 back to 3B, BR awarded 1B on the INT and credited with a base hit. [Next batter hits a home run to win the game - Hollywood ending, of course.]

Could you make an argument that the runner's play prevented a DP. Probably. Can you justify 2 outs here by rule? Not so sure. But it's a little different than if this runner had already been retired, or if he/she interfered w/ a popup.

[SRW]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

An out by interference is not a force out. I think ASA is pretty clear on this matter

Got any backup references to this statement?

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

An out by interference is not a force out. I think ASA is pretty clear on this matter, and yes, there are occasions where an act of INT may be advantageous to the offense. Example: R1 on 3B, R2 on 1B, 1 out. The batter is notoriously slow runner. Infielders are playing behind the runners and batter hits a routine grounder to F4. R2, knowing that this will likely turn into an inning ending DP, times his/her running into the path of the ball which hits him/her. Dead ball, R2 is out, R1 back to 3B, BR awarded 1B on the INT and credited with a base hit. [Next batter hits a home run to win the game - Hollywood ending, of course.]

Could you make an argument that the runner's play prevented a DP. Probably. Can you justify 2 outs here by rule? Not so sure. But it's a little different than if this runner had already been retired, or if he/she interfered w/ a popup.

Um, in your sitch, if I felt that the runner had done this deliberately, I'd have R1 out based on 8-7-P.

If R1 had already crossed the plate, I'd have the BR out, as they are now the closest to HP. Since they haven't reached 1B yet, no runs score.

[Dakota]

ASA is also clear that, for rules intents and purposes, the out on the BR at 1B is a force (see, eg., the ruling on the "force" being reinstated if the BR moves back toward home after touching 1B). So, how can INT by the BR be a "force" out for run scoring purposes while INT by any other runner isn't?