greatest interference play i ever heard
 

A fellow umpire gave me this scenario
scored tied,bottom of the 7th runners on 2nd and 3rd high fly ball hit to ss runner from 3rd base raises home, runner on 2nd base grabs ss as she is ready to catch fly ball (remember runner on 3rd touched home when interference accurs) would you let the winning run to score?

Dead ball on the interference, which is a batted ball. No action can occur as a result.

interference happened after the runner crossed home

No

On a batted ball!

Think to yourself here Andy. If SS had caught the fly ball, and had not been interfered with at all, and then had thrown to third on an appeal, what would you have had?

Doesn't matter.

remember fellow umps last base touched at the time of interference so runner on 3rd already touched home when inter ference occurs

Answer my previous question about the ball being caught. Do you care then that the runner has already crossed home? Or, will you honor the appeal?

Oh...also, for the play you stated in the OP, the information you provide here is totally irrelevant.

An out on the appeal
 

But that's not what happened in the OP. I would let the run score as home was the last base legally touched prior to the interference. The argument could be made that since he left early home was not "legally" touched. However, I would not interpret it that way because we are never to give away that a runner left early. This, in my opinion, is similar to assuming that a runner touched a base unless properly appealed. Then you rule on the appeal. So, until a valid appeal is made at third, I would score the run but wait to leave the field in order to give the defense a chance to appeal.

Sure it matters
 

You don't put the runner back on third. He touched home before the appeal. Score the run, but wait to leave the field to give the defense an opportunity to appeal the runner leaving early.

How is it irrelevant?
 

It is most certainly relevant as on any interference call, you put runners back to the last base touched.

In my old 2008 ASA rule book:

and

R2 would have been the "immediate" previous runner, no? No run scores.

EDIT: Oops, 8.2.K is a "thrown" ball. Hmmm...

The OP didn't include the number of outs
 

Also, the interference was on batted ball, not a thrown ball. So 8.2.K doesn't apply. The exception to 8.7J-L does apply. If the interference prevents the fielder from catching a routine fly ball, fair or foul, with ordinary effort, the batter is also out.

So if there were two outs, then the run would not score.

Correct, but if the batter-runner is retired before safely reaching 1B, then no runs score if that's the 3rd out.

The only way this would result in the runner scoring is if there are no outs.

From the offense's perspective, I think this only works with less than 2 outs.

The ball becomes dead at the time of interference.

When there is interference, return any runners to the last base touched at the time of the interference.

For this to work for the offense, timing is important. R2 must not interfere until R1 has touched or crossed home.

By rule, I think you score the run.

At a NUS a couple of years ago, I presented a similar scenario to our instructors. KR ruled that the run would score. I'm not sure, but this may have also been included in one of the ASA rules and clarifications articles.

Less than 1 out. The runner is out, and by the rule cited rwest, the batter-runner would also be out.

I agree
 

However, the OP never said anything about the number of outs. Did it?

So let's consider if R2 is simply hit by a line drive while off the base. In this case, R1 would likely not have passed home plate, unless he was Flash.

I this case, R2 is out for INT, R1 is returned to 3B, and credit the batter with a base hit and award 1B.

Different Scenario than the OP
 

This is different than the OP, but correct on the ruling.

No, I think a number of us (myself included) assumed there were 2 outs.

There was no catch, so the runner leaving early or late is moot.

sorry fellow umps there were no outs and you can not appeal the play, the ball was never caught, glad eeryone is putting in there input

Yeah, we kinda needed that information. ;)

True!
 

I sit corrected!

so are we all in agreement the runner on 3rd has to score since there are 0 outs and the ball was not caught for a legal appeal ,what can we do as umps but to have our car started and run as fast as we can.

As a creative former player/coach, I'm now even considering if the run would score had there been two outs. Because of the interference by R2, I'm thinking BR is still awarded 1B and credited with a hit.

I recall a play I had last season w/ R1 on third, R2 on second and 2 outs. Batter hits a routine grounder to F6 who fields it cleanly. Had he simply thrown to 1B, the BR would have been retired easily [assuming no muff by F3]. But R2 ran very close to F6, but not past him. For some reason, F6 then decided to take the "easy out" right in front of him by tagging R2. But R2 had baited him and headed back to second base. There was a resulting rundown and R2 was eventually tagged out, but long after R1 had crossed home. So score that run. BR did reach 1B because of the rundown.

Can the same logic be applied to our OP with 2 outs?

If this is such a great play, why don't we ever see it? How has ASA covered their collective bases on this one?

No, because in all rule codes (NFHS, ASA, NCAA) of a routine (fair) fly, both the runner and batter are out, or in the case of 2 out, the batter has finished her turn at bat but did not reach first, and no run can score if the BR does not reach first.

Interesting, very interesting
 

The run might score, however, I don't believe BR would be credited with a hit. Upon calling interference we have the third out of the inning, so how can BR be credited with a hit? The run scores because it occurred before
the interference. Not sure how the BR can cause a run to score and not be credited with a hit or a sacrifice. Don't know how to record this in the stats. All that being said, the third out of the inning is not a force, so maybe the run does count. There is no fourth out appeal here to negate the run scored, because there is no appeal to be made.

So it appears that the only way the run would not score is when there is 1 out. Rule 10 doesn't apply because we have not made a reversal of a umpires decision nor did we make a delayed call that put the offense or defense in jeopardy.

Seems like there is a hole in the rules here.

That's not true for ASA
 

No run shall be scored if the THIRD out of the inning is the result of....

A batter runner being called out prior to reaching first base.

This was not the third out but the fourth out in the scenario where there was 2 outs. The third out was the interference.

Suppose we don't have the runner at third (so not as to ask about run scoring). Who will lead off the next inning? Not the BR, because that at bat is finished, over, kaput, ended, "all" (Central PA phrasing). Therefore the BR did not reach first base, and therefore no runs can score.

OK, suppose there is not runner at third. If there is INT by [now] R1 on the SS, that is the third out, and, yes, I believe BR is awarded 1B and credited with a hit.

Unless there's a rule reference I can check once I have my book in front of me...

I understand what you are saying...
 

I would love to be able to use the logic you have purposed. However, there's no support for it in the rule book. The third out was not the batter-runner. And I don't believe you are correct about who will bat next inning. There is no justification for a fourth out here. The third out ended the inning. That was the interference. The batter-runner's at bat never ended because she was never put out. You can't get 4 outs in an inning except on missing or leaving a base early and then only when it applies to a runner who scored.

If that is the case
 

If the BR is credited with a hit, then I can see the batters at bat coming to a completion.

Not if it is a fly ball, both would be out, being if the ball is fair (in ASA, if the ball is fair or foul). On a ground ball, yes, the BR is credited with a Fielder's choice in ASA, FC or hit in NCAA (but I really don't care, I don't score). However, the OP would not happen on a grounder, unless a) the runner was stealing and b) the ball was a slow roller.

Therefore, in the OP, if no outs, it seems the run would score (would need to be a sky high pop up) and a runner leaving way early. With one or two outs, there is no issue.

The at-bat is completed because the batter became a BR. Doesn't matter what happens after that on the play, she is not batting again. She put the ball in play, and that play resulted in the 3rd out. Her at bat is done.That quirky ruling only applies to ASA.

Ok
 

I'm sold on her at bat ending, but not on the negating of the run with 2 outs. The third out of the inning was not the BR being put out before reaching 1st.

BTW, which rule set are we discussing here? Any? All? Some? One?

I was speaking ASA
 

I don't believe the OP stated which rule set.

Cool... I have TWO outs, then ... and not 1. The interference prevented an easy double play (catch, throw to third).

I think this is more than Central PA phrasing....:rolleyes:....but the rule specifically notes the BR or another runner forced being retired for the 3rd out of the inning. Nowhere does it state that the BR not reaching 1B safely nullifies a run not even in RS #43.

However, many of you may be confused by a previous interpretation that when the defense executes two outs with two outs already in the book, that the defense could basically elect which out would be the third out for the purpose of nullifying a run. This was the same time when a fourth out appeal could be executed on a BR/R who did not score to nullify a run. Remember, though, these were interpretations, not necessarily black and white rules. Well, except for the fourth out appeal thingy.

How would you rule?
 

So, what is your ruling? Would the run count if there were two outs in the book?

You're assuming that the ball would have been caught. You can't assume that. The only other out you can get is the BR.

What rules basis do you have for saying you can't assume that? The more "normal" 2-out interference is with a runner committing intentional interference to break up a double play - you "assume" that the 2nd out would have been made in that case... why is this play any different? The rules simply say the Umpire is to rule a 2nd out as well if in his judgement the interference prevented a double play. This sitch is no different (and is also supported by the common sense idea that the offense should not benefit from interference).

Ok, but you still can't get the runner from 3rd out
 

The runner at 2nd interfered before she was put out. This requires the trailing runner to be called out. That would be the BR. Still can't get the runner from third out.

Can someone reference what rule(s) some of you are talking about?

A few posts back, I mentioned a situation I posed at NUS on which KR ruled.

Bases loaded, 1 out. Batter hits a [sky-high, for those that need this] popup near first base. Initial call is IF, batter is out, if fair. The runner from third breaks for home. She touches home before INT occurs. B/R, now potentially retired, if fair, intentionally interferes w/ F3 causing her to not catch the ball, which was in fair territory.

The ruling was INT by a retired B/R. B/R is already out so the runner closest to home is also out. That runner is the one on second base. Score the run. Inning, potentially game, now over.

I think the difference is that in the above case, we have INT by a retired B/R.

Given the same situation and she bunted a [sky-high, for those that need this] popup, which cannot be an IF, and all other things happened the same, do we have 1 out [on the B/R who INT w/ F3], or 2 outs based on rule reference X.X.x?

I certainly don't have the stature to argue with KR but interference with an infield fly is not interference by a retired batter runner. It's not quite on point but see 8-2-I which would be very inconsistent if the BR was out in this situation.

wow did everyone get off on different plays then first described all that is stated do we score the runner from third, 1st criteria ball is not caught, 2nd runner on 3rd touched home before interference , we have 0 outs what is all the confusion do we score runnner and go home or not?

Yes
 

Score the run and quickly head to the car!

Well, when you don't provide a clear scenario, that's what will happen. :p

Pretty clear cut,except for 0 outs
scored tied,bottom of the 7th runners on 2nd and 3rd high fly ball hit to ss runner from 3rd base raises home, runner on 2nd base grabs ss as she is ready to catch fly ball (remember runner on 3rd touched home when interference accurs) would you let the winning run to score?
Edit/Delete Message

I don't. I have intentional interference to prevent a double play. Runner on 3rd out, runner on 2nd out, batter to first.

still not possible
 

The rule says you get the trailing runner out. Not the lead runner.

tell them RW YOU CAN GET A DP but runner still scores

I thought I did
 

I think that's what I said. :)

Which was, of course, critical to giving an answer, which led to all of the alternate scenarios. :rolleyes:

But, even though the way the situation was stated in the OP was an invitation to elaboration and alternate scenarios, we've never really needed a reason to go OT around here. :)

Did someone say beer?

Deja vu.

All over again.

It was the responders which ASSUMED and try to apply different scenarios involving outs that were not offered. If you don't tell me there are outs, I addressing the scenario as if there were no outs.

And yes, I would allow the run to score.

Gee, that kind of sucks, doesn't it?
:confused:

Andy is right. According to the rules, the run scores. Doesn't say I have to like it.

I know - sometimes I wish I was one of those guys who could just make up rulings as I feel.

Irish Mafia I respect your opionion so if you say run scores Now i know the run scores, Kenny keep on thinking of these scenarios