Runner Lying on base
 

Situation: Men's ASA Slowpitch - R1 on 2nd, R2 on 1st - Batter hits ball into outfield, R2 is a much faster runner than R1 and is right behind R1 when approaching home plate. Ball gets to catcher but is up the 1st base line as R1 slides into home. R1 is on top of base, but there is some uncovered at the back corner. R2 steps on back of plate just before catcher jumps over R1 to make tag. R1 did nothing purposely to keep the catcher from reaching R2.

Is R2 safe or should interference be called on R1?

Wow...this is definitely a HTBT to see this play.

In reading your description, I would ask if F2 would have been able to reach and tag R2 before he touched the plate if R1 was not there. If the answer is yes, then an interference call is correct. If the answer to that question is no, then no interference call as there is not a play to be interfered with.

You did say the throw was up the first base line, I'm envisioning that F2 had to take a few steps away from the plate to go get the ball and then had to move back to the plate to try to make a play. That leads me to think that there is not interference here.

Run has already scored. This is nothing

I always thought Men's Slow Pitch players lie whether they are on the base or not:D:D:D:D:D

At least they're not laying on the base. :eek:

At least they're not laying on the base. :eek:

We've all heard their "motto"..
 

"If you ain't cheatin' you ain't tryin'!"

That wasnt even funny the first time....;)

There is potential for interference by a runner who scored. But it is too difficult to tell whether this would apply. We would need to know exactly where the runner was, what the catcher had to do, etc.

The bold part is the crux. Was jumping over R1 needed to reach the tag?

What difference does it make if R2 has already touched the plate?

Possibility of interference by runner who has scored. Keep reading.

Hmmmmmmmm
R1 has scored. R2 has scored. Interference by which runner that has scored - and with what play?

If I'm following this right, the question is, "did r1 interfere f2's play on r2"?

That's how I read it, also. I also read that R2 touched the plate prior to the catcher starting to go over R1. So, IMJ, even if you consider R1 to being a hinderance or impediment (which I would not) to F2, R2 had scored by the time that impediment became a factor in the attempted play.

Hugo,
Look at this sequence again - "R2 steps on back of plate just before catcher jumps over R1 to make tag. R1 did nothing purposely to keep the catcher from reaching R2."

As I read this, R2 had scored before F2 attempted to make a play. So, what play was interfered with?

I think the problem is this:

R2 steps on back of plate just before catcher jumps over R1 to make tag

Some are reading that as typed - 1) R2 steps on plate; 2) Catcher jumps.

Others are reading that to say R2's step was just before THE TAG... IOW - Catcher jumps, R2 steps, Catcher tags.

Not positive it makes a difference - but I see that as the crux of the difference of opinion among your responses.

I think you're right in reading the communication problem. Now the thing I'm interested in is the second. What would you have to see to have interference there?

I'm not sure why that part is difficult. Understanding the timing on THIS play may be an issue (HTBT), but I think the ruling should be apparent.

My practical answer is if I believe R2 would be out if R1 wasn't in the way, then it is interference. R1 (a runner that has already scored) has no rule exemption to hinder the defense from making a play, unintentionally or otherwise (NOTE: no book in hand, in hotel room ready to go out my games of the day).

If I believe R2 would be safe regardless, then R1's position is immaterial. No possible out equals no play, so no interference.

I suppose the next post will include someone saying R1 was just doing what runners should do (slide, yes, but cover and block the plate, no), and/or that they cannot go 'poof' after scoring. Cite me a rule that supports anything but interference if a runner that has already scored actually hinders the defense from making a play.

I think this is what I said in post #2 of this thread.....

Yes, you did. Full credit for correctness.

Reality is that some topics need the naysayers to try to explain their logic, or others to make sure they fully agree what the question is before they are ready to hear the right answer. Your answer was simply too soon for most to accept, despite being completely correct.

It is rare that any posted question is so clear, and the first response also so clear and accurate that a thread dies that fast. Look at the double first base thread, for example. Asked, answered, still lives.