Question from WCWS

[HollowMan]

My 12 YO daughter and I were watching the Hawaii vs North Dakota State game this weekend, and had a question regarding a play that happened in the game.

North Dakota State was batting, two out, runners on first and second. The ball was hit to the second baseman, and just as the ball got there the baserunner going from first to second collided with the second baseman. Runner goes flying, fielder goes flying, ball goes flying. As the runner is trying to crawl to second base, the shortstop picks up the ball and tags the runner out before she gets to the base. Prior to the tag, the runner who was on second base crossed home plate.

The Hawaii coach was ejected arguing over the interference call, but what my daughter and I did not understand was that the run was counted. Isn't tagging the runner the same as stepping on the bag, thus forcing the runner and negating the run?

Thanks in advance.

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by HollowMan

My 12 YO daughter and I were watching the Hawaii vs North Dakota State game this weekend, and had a question regarding a play that happened in the game.

North Dakota State was batting, two out, runners on first and second. The ball was hit to the second baseman, and just as the ball got there the baserunner going from first to second collided with the second baseman. Runner goes flying, fielder goes flying, ball goes flying. As the runner is trying to crawl to second base, the shortstop picks up the ball and tags the runner out before she gets to the base. Prior to the tag, the runner who was on second base crossed home plate.

The Hawaii coach was ejected arguing over the interference call, but what my daughter and I did not understand was that the run was counted. Isn't tagging the runner the same as stepping on the bag, thus forcing the runner and negating the run?

Thanks in advance.

Yes.....it was a force out.
You and your daughter are correct....good catch!

[RKBUmp]

It appears F4 muffed the play on the ball prior to the contact, hence the non interference call. Now the question is, why didnt the umpire now rule obstruction on F4? The fielder was not in posession of the ball, was no longer making a play on the ball and definitely hindered the runner.

[DNTXUM P]

Originally Posted by RKBUmp

It appears F4 muffed the play on the ball prior to the contact, hence the non interference call. Now the question is, why didnt the umpire now rule obstruction on F4? The fielder was not in posession of the ball, was no longer making a play on the ball and definitely hindered the runner.

It appeared to me that the ball was still in the fielders hands when contact occured. Whether or not she was in control, it appeared she was, but possibly not. From what i saw, the fielder was definitely still making a play on the ball and did not hinder the runner - hence no obstruction. But I do not know how someone on the field did not catch the tag for the 3rd out before the runner reached the base - it was not a timing play

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by DNTXUM P

It appeared to me that the ball was still in the fielders hands when contact occured. Whether or not she was in control, it appeared she was, but possibly not. From what i saw, the fielder was definitely still making a play on the ball and did not hinder the runner - hence no obstruction. But I do not know how someone on the field did not catch the tag for the 3rd out before the runner reached the base - it was not a timing play

I think the crew just got caught up in the play and what happened in the aftermath...U1 has the EJ, U3 is getting the ejected Hawaii HC off the field, PU had waved in a trainer to attend to one of the players and moved into an area near the circle; I mean there was a lot going on. I'm not offering that as an excuse for them not catching the fact that the run was allowed to score....just saying.

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by RKBUmp

It appears F4 muffed the play on the ball prior to the contact, hence the non interference call. Now the question is, why didnt the umpire now rule obstruction on F4? The fielder was not in posession of the ball, was no longer making a play on the ball and definitely hindered the runner.

In U1's judgement, he felt that it was a wreck, and gave the appropriate signal.

IMO, watched the replay numerous times....wreck? possible; INF? possible; OBS? no.

[RKBUmp]

So, that wasnt interference or obstruction, but then in the Notre Dame/ UA game they called a runner for interference who was in the baseline and had a ball thrown directly at her.

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by RKBUmp

So, that wasnt interference or obstruction, but then in the Notre Dame/ UA game they called a runner for interference who was in the baseline and had a ball thrown directly at her.

I'm sure I'm missing something, but you're losing me here. What's an INF call in the ND/UA game have to do with this call?

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by KJUmp

Yes.....it was a force out.
You and your daughter are correct....good catch!

Aren't 12 year olds wonderful?

[Andy]

I had the opportunity to speak with the UIC for this regional.

The explanation for the non-interference call is that is was a judgement call be the umpire. Period.

The explanation for why the run was allowed to score - after the collision, umpire states he saw the runner touch second base, lost contact with the base, and was tagged out. The force was not in effect when the runner was tagged.

Yes, this was part of a conversation between innings that we did not see on TV.....

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by Andy

- after the collision, umpire states he saw the runner touch second base, lost contact with the base,

Throughout this thread, my only criticism had been of the crew allowing the run to score. I've supported everything that I saw U1 do on the play, including the non INF call as it is his judgement.

But after reading that statement, all I can say is WTF?
I can't believe how he could say that to his crew or the UIC. His eyes (actually his head) never seemed to move away from the runner and the bag, nor did it appear that he, at any point, got screened by any of the players. I was impressed that he stayed with the play, despite all the chaos, and was right there for the out call on the tag. So his statement really has me scratching my head.

Question Andy, any mention by the UIC of video of the play being reviewed with the crew after the game?