What do you do?

MD Longhorn · #1 (**permalink**) Mon Jul 22, 2013, 08:53am

Perhaps a play where someone was actually affected would make this clearer to some.

Grounder to F4, who fields the ball cleanly. As she is beginning to throw to 1st base, she is struck by a ball that came from another field, and she throws errantly, causing the batter runner to be safe.

A) Umpire the game in front of you - runner is safe.
B) Dead ball, reset (do-over)
C) Dead ball, place runners where you think they would have gotten to, no outs.
D) Dead ball, place runners and grant outs where you think they would have gotten to or happened.

My ruling - A. Soon to be ejected DC's ruling is likely B or D.

xtremeump · #2 (**permalink**) Mon Jul 22, 2013, 09:44am

If a batted ball comes from another field and in your judgement the ball affected the play on your field "we do nothing" ? I agree Umpire your game, however commonsense and advantage/disadvantage has to be used in this OP.

MD Longhorn · #3 (**permalink**) Mon Jul 22, 2013, 11:35am

Quote:

Originally Posted by xtremeump

If a batted ball comes from another field and in your judgement the ball affected the play on your field "we do nothing" ? I agree Umpire your game, however commonsense and advantage/disadvantage has to be used in this OP.

You would have no rules basis for such a ruling.

Would you treat it the same if F4 was distracted by an errant cup that flew over from another field? A leaf? A bird or bee? Dust? A loud cheer? Why would a ball be different from the rest of these?

youngump · #4 (**permalink**) Mon Jul 22, 2013, 11:59am

Quote:

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

You would have no rules basis for such a ruling.

Would you treat it the same if F4 was distracted by an errant cup that flew over from another field? A leaf? A bird or bee? Dust? A loud cheer? Why would a ball be different from the rest of these?

Well you do if you call it spectator interference. Though whether you can seems less clear. If the fans of the other team threw a medicine ball at the fielder intentionally you'd call it interference right? What if they intentionally threw a softball? So the only difference here is that they weren't watching the game and they didn't do it on purpose. That may be enough to hang your hat on, but I think the spirit of the spectator interference rule was to neutralize non-participants impact on the game. I could be very wrong though.

IRISHMAFIA · #5 (**permalink**) Mon Jul 22, 2013, 12:28pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by youngump

Well you do if you call it spectator interference. Though whether you can seems less clear. If the fans of the other team threw a medicine ball at the fielder intentionally you'd call it interference right? What if they intentionally threw a softball? So the only difference here is that they weren't watching the game and they didn't do it on purpose. That may be enough to hang your hat on, but I think the spirit of the spectator interference rule was to neutralize non-participants impact on the game. I could be very wrong though.

Read spectator interference. It specifically involves A SPECTATOR entering or reaching into the field of play.

I really don't care what happens, other than a medical emergency, once the play started, it is going to finish before I stop play.

And please, a medicine ball? Really? Just how ****ing young are you? Most of the softball spectators I know couldn't throw a medicine ball 2 feet. Next thing you know, you are going to want to stop the play because someone's pet pigeon landed on 2B and scared the SS.

youngump · #6 (**permalink**) Mon Jul 22, 2013, 01:34pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Read spectator interference. It specifically involves A SPECTATOR entering or reaching into the field of play.

I really don't care what happens, other than a medical emergency, once the play started, it is going to finish before I stop play.

And please, a medicine ball? Really? Just how ****ing young are you? Most of the softball spectators I know couldn't throw a medicine ball 2 feet. Next thing you know, you are going to want to stop the play because someone's pet pigeon landed on 2B and scared the SS.

Obviously you misread the tone of my reply if it was able to make you angry enough to swear at me. The point of using an extreme example is to make one think about the limits of the way one is reading the rule. Obviously it isn't going to happen. So what? The rules supplement is fairly clear and also not in harmony with the actual definition of interference. I don't think positing it for discussion including the phrase at the end I may be very wrong is as terrible a thing as your tone suggests.

That said, I'm content enough with being told that this isn't the way it's done and should it ever happen, I'll know how to deal with it.

MD Longhorn · #7 (**permalink**) Mon Jul 22, 2013, 12:35pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by youngump

Well you do if you call it spectator interference.

You can "call it" whatever you want to... but calling this spectator interference is no more accurate than calling it an infield fly.

8-2-N: When a spectator reaches into live ball territory and interferes with a fielder's opportunity to catch a fly ball.

Do we have that here? No.

8-5-L: When a spectator interferes with any thrown or fair batted ball.

Do we have that here? No.

We simply have an object that came from elsewhere distracting someone.

Skahtboi · #8 (**permalink**) Mon Jul 22, 2013, 12:39pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

You can "call it" whatever you want to... but calling this spectator interference is no more accurate than calling it an infield fly.

I must have sun stroke from working in the heat all weekend, because that line actually made me laugh out loud.

AtlUmpSteve · #9 (**permalink**) Mon Jul 22, 2013, 01:17pm

I feel you, YoungUmp; you were searching for a rule reference that related to a nonparticipant or situation (I really didn't read the OP to be suggesting someone threw the ball on the field, I took it more to be a foul ball off an adjacent field) that possibly affected the play on your field.

But, you used a specified and intentionally limited rule to try to cover this; just like we cannot declare umpire interference when an umpire DOES interfere, but not in the defined way, we cannot use spectator interference in the undefined way.

There are two options. 1) Unless you absolutely/positively have someone in imminent danger of serious injury, DON'T be the leming that yells "Time" whenever a ball approaches your field during live play. Sure, if you can stop it before live play, not a bad plan; but once the ball is in live play, 10-4.E says SHALL NOT CALL TIME while any play is in progress. 2) If you DO kill play on your field, the PU has to apply 10-4.G (the ONLY rule that can apply when violating 10-4.E) and make a best judgment ruling awarding bases; and do-over and even apparent outs aren't legal options. Anything else is a lost protest. Since that never leaves people happy, try not to get there.

No, you cannot apply 10.1, either; it is covered in 10.4 that you shall not call time.