Interference question - does the run count?
 

NFHS or ASA (I believe they will both have the same ruling)

R1 at third, R2 at first, 1 out.
Ground ball to SS, throws to second for out #2
Retired R2 intentionally interfers with throw to first.
By rule, the interference on a retired runner causes the runner closest to home to be called out for out #3.

If R1 has already scored at the time of the interference,
then the batter-runner would be the third out of the inning. If this is the
case, does the run score?

What if the B/R reaches first prior to the interference?

Speaking ASA:
My initial thought is: no, the run does not score. The ball is immediately dead at the time of the INT, and the runner closest to home is out (8-7-P). Since R1 had already crossed the plate, the next closest runner to home is out: B4. Since B4 was put out prior to reaching 1B, we now have 3 outs, and the third out was called prior to B4 reaching 1B.

However, let me throw this in there to see what you think... When INT is called, the BR is awarded 1B (see NOTE: Section 7J-L). So this becomes a matter of procedure. Do you immediately apply the penalty (BR is out), or do you make the award, then apply the penalty?

My interpretation is that the ball is immediately dead, the penalty is given first, and THEN any awards are made.

Then the run definitely scores. The BR is still out, but they're called out while on the base they had already reached at the time of the INT.

Scenarios:

a) BR reached 1B prior to the interference (and I assume R1 has scored - either that or a very slow R1). Dead ball, BR out. Run scores.

b) R1 has not scored at the time of the interference. Dead ball, R1 out (obviously, no run scores).

c) R1 has scored, BR has not yet reached 1B. Dead ball, BR out, no run scores (BR out for 3rd out prior to reaching 1B).

ASA. I would have a hard time calling INT at all if (with R1 across the plate) the BR had actually reached 1B before R2 did whatever he did (grabbed F6's arm, stuck up his hand to block the throw, etc.). If R2 remained near 1B and swatted the throw an instant after the BR touched 1B, that's another story. But I can't see calling INT on R2 unless there's a reasonable excuse for a play somewhere.

On a play in a similar theoretical vein:

R1 on 3B, R2 on 2B, 1 out. B3 pops toward 1B. R1 thinks there are 2 outs and crosses the plate. The BR deliberately crashes F3 to prevent a double play.

The ruling is that the BR is out for INT, and R2 (the runner closest to home) is out.

But does R1's run count? (In other words, is the BR the second out and R2 the third, or are both outs simultaneous with the INT? Was the third out the BR before reaching 1B or R2 on a time play?)

Not that they care, but ASA's interp that a runner who crosses the plate before INT occurs on a fly ball is not the runner closest to home has always bothered me.

I don't know about Fed, but in NCAA, any INT before the BR reaches 1B returns all runners TOP.

Good point.

Agreed. I was taking the OP at face value that all criteria of INT had been met, just for the sake of argument.

Let's also caution against going too far the other way. The criteria to be used when judging interference is if the runner hasn't yet reached, not if you think the ball would still beat the runner.

Agreed, but if the BR is a lightning-fast runner, the fielder hadn't started the throw yet, and there was absolutely ZERO potential for getting the out (ie., 3 feet shy of the base), then I can't call INT.

But if there's any doubt, then the benefit of the doubt goes in favor of the defense being able to make the play.

ASA's definition of interference {like OBR and Fed baseball, FWIW} requires that the defensive player be attempting a play. The Fed definition omits that element. Does that mean that the ruling when the batter has crossed first before the purported interference would be run scores and batter out under Fed, but no interference at all under ASA?

Not so. See 12.2.2 to 12.2.5 Effect

This thread became so convoluted so quick, I stopped reading in the middle of the third post.

We're umpires. We have short atten...

Oh, look, a monkey!

I knew that you guys were simply positing that legitimate INT had occurred. I was just sticking my two cents in.

And yes, we should not go too far the other way. Practically anything short of "Why was he trying to make a throw?" should qualify as an "opportunity to make a play on another runner."

Not so. See [NCAA] 12.2.2 to 12.2.5 Effect

You're right. Even though the book [12-18 Interference] says, "If the BR has not touched 1B at the time of the INT, each runner shall return to the base legally occupied at the time of the pitch," there are some TOI cases, such as BR INT by sliding into 1B to interfere with a play on another runner, and BR INT involving the running lane. Strange, though, that those instances of INT are TOI while dropping or throwing the bat onto a fair ball becomes INT TOP. So why state the general rule if there are significant exceptions?

(edited) ops! I didn't see last part

it is extremely unlikely that a BR could reach 1B before the interference would occur, but given your OP scenario that both R1 crossed the plate and BR reaches first to become R3 BEFORE the interference, the closest runner to home after R2 is put out, would be the BR turned R3. because the BR reached 1B before the interference, the force is off, and it does become a timing play, so I would say R1 scores if both R1 crosses the plate, and BR reaches first before the interference.

Re-read that which you again cited without quoting. No, not everyone has the new rulebook at this point; even citing the proper rule would help. Four states won't play NFHS Softball until the fall, so the 2010 Rulebooks will be made available in about 5 months. Looking at my most recent rulebook, not on page 66 that year, however, Rule 8-2 (10-14 PENALTY):

Since R2 was already out when interfering, the proper rule is 8-6-18, interference by a retired runner; Penalty states ball is dead and the runner closest to home at the time of the interference shall be declared out.

Your citation of 8-6 (10-14) Penalty applies only when a runner that is NOT already retired interferes with the front end of an obvious double play. Not in this post.