|
|
|||
Interference
I came across this passage in another string and wanted to get some more information on it:
Had a partner early this season.. had a few year experience elsewhere but been out of the game for a couple of years. His mechanics and game management were pretty good but he had to come to me after calling and INT on runner from 3B who bumped F5 going for a foul fly ball coming down by the 3B coaches box. He was correct in calling it INT but could not remember what we did with the batter in that instance. It was a HS game so the batter gets a foul ball and remains at bat, R on 3B is out. Heard of a similar situation at an ASA tournament last year which generated a lot of discussion among umpires. In the ASA game, we actually get 2 outs on this play, the runner who interfered and the batter. My question is about the timing of the interference. Typically, it's called at the point it occurs. With a runner on 3rd who releases on the pitch and comes down the line, F5 is playing in. The batter hits a foul ball near the 3rd base fence. As the runner is coming down the line and F5 turns to make a play on the ball, both players collide. So usually, we have the INT call. If the ball falls in an area where F5 could have caught it without the interference, it looks justified. What if the ball hits on top of the fence. This would require an exceptional play on F5's part. What if the ball lands 20 feet outside the fence and no way could F5 have made a play on it. When do you make the INT call? Do you delay a bit to see where the ball might end up? Thanx.
__________________
Ted USA & NFHS Softball |
|
|||
You cannot delay an interference call to see what happens afterward. When it happens, you call it. The only exception is on umpire interference by the plate umpire with the catcher's throw to retire a runner.
When it happens on a foul fly, you have to judge at the moment the interference occurs that the fielder could have made the catch with ordinary effort had there been no interference.
__________________
"Let's face it. Umpiring is not an easy or happy way to make a living. In the abuse they suffer, and the pay they get for it, you see an imbalance that can only be explained by their need to stay close to a game they can't resist." -- Bob Uecker |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
The interference happens when it happens... but an immediate call is not necessarily critical in this particular play. If you know it's catchable when the INT happens, call it. But on those plays where the ball is possibly going to end up near fence, there's nothing wrong with waiting a hair before announcing the call. After all, you can't really rule interference with a catch if there's no catch to be had.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'” West Houston Mike |
|
|||
Then you are going to lose the protest.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball. |
|
|||
Out of curiosity, how would you word the protest.
It's a matter of timing, isn't it? I have to have all the information. Is there a play possible? Is it F5's play? In case I mis worded what I wrote, I'm not saying I would treat it as a DDB, I'm only saying I wouldn't rule the interference just because I saw the collision. But again, what exactly would be protested? |
|
|||
The protest for what?
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'” West Houston Mike |
|
|||
In FED, the protest would be on the misapplication of rule 5-1-1m.
__________________
"Let's face it. Umpiring is not an easy or happy way to make a living. In the abuse they suffer, and the pay they get for it, you see an imbalance that can only be explained by their need to stay close to a game they can't resist." -- Bob Uecker |
|
|||
If it is INT, it is a dead ball. If you didn't rule the ball dead at the time of the INT, how can you possibly have INT without admitting you were inappropriately delaying the call hence a misapplication.
ASA is consistent with their rules as it pertains to any INT call on any team personnel, the ball is dead, period. Not applying that effect to the call, IMO, is a misapplication or misinterpretation of the rule, not a judgment call.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball. |
|
|||
Quote:
|
Bookmarks |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Umpire Interference / Batter Interference | bob jenkins | Baseball | 17 | Mon Feb 06, 2012 09:57pm |
batters interference/interference by teammate | _Bruno_ | Baseball | 7 | Mon Apr 07, 2008 07:28am |
Runner interference versus umpire interference | Jay R | Baseball | 1 | Thu Apr 28, 2005 07:00pm |
Interference | just another ref | Baseball | 3 | Wed Jun 16, 2004 12:54am |
Interference? | JRSooner | Baseball | 3 | Fri Apr 09, 2004 11:11am |