![]() |
|
|
|||
Interference?
It's me against the world on another thread...
Runner on 3rd, count is 3-0. With a right handed batter, the next pitch is a ball wide outside, and it gets away from the catcher. The runner attempts to steal home, but the batter, upset about walking again, just stands in the box with a sour face. The catcher retrieves the ball and flips it to the pitcher as she comes in to cover the steal, but the batter still has one foot in the box as she's attempting to walk to first and the runner slides in safely around the batters foot. Call?
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'” West Houston Mike |
|
|||
I think would have to be there. The way it's written, I've got a big fat nothing. The run scores.
As I read the scenario, other than physically being present near the plate, the batter-runner has not yet interfered with anyone's ability to make a play. Last edited by teebob21; Wed Sep 25, 2013 at 01:48pm. |
|
|||
Quote:
Forget intent, or even what she was thinking or why still standing there. Did she interfere?
__________________
Steve ASA/ISF/NCAA/NFHS/PGF |
|
|||
Good point, Steve.
Let's assume, for the purpose of the argument, that absent the batter, the throw would have (in the judgement of the umpire) been caught by the pitcher and they would have gotten the runner out. I'm not sure I agree with your "no longer has the right to occupy the batters box" comment. I don't see a rule to support that. The batter-runner is not required to be in any particular spot - we don't proscribe where she's allowed to run (well... running lane stuff, but that doesn't apply here). To me, this play does not differ from the following: Runner on 2nd, BR walked and the ball gets away up the first base line a bit. Runner breaks, F2 retrieves the ball and throws to 3rd, striking BR as she proceeds up the line. That's not interference. Why would the OP be? In every other case (running lane aside), we require intent to call an out when a thrown ball strikes a live runner (or batter-runner). Why would this play be any different?
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'” West Houston Mike |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Steve M |
|
|||
Impeding a thrown ball, and impeding a fielder are quite different.
The OP reads as the BR has started toward 1st, therefore no "sanctuary" of just completing a pitch or a swing. Yes, we need to know if the BR impeded/hindered the pitcher and his second post read that way ("absent the batter, the throw would have (in the judgment of the umpire) been caught by the pitcher and they would have gotten the runner out") .
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT. It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be. |
|
|||
I'm still looking for "responsibility to advance" and "right to be in the batters box" in my book. Or anything along that line at all. The batters box is no sanctuary ... but it's not a danger spot either. It's just another place on the field at this point in the play - no different than being 4 feet up the line, 30 feet up the line, or halfway to second. There is no obligation anywhere that the runner must proceed forward on the basepaths, and if she doesn't, fielders can throw at her to get her out.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'” West Houston Mike |
|
|||
Mike....now you know how I feel regarding the other play from that site....
![]()
__________________
It's what you learn after you think you know it all that's important! |
|
|||
Ah ... you must be the 2 base award on the ball that was bobbled by a fielder before going over a temporary fence guy. If so, yes, you were out on your own on that one.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'” West Houston Mike |
|
|||
Quote:
![]()
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball. |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
As stated by others this is a batter-runner not a batter. Nothing in the rules requires her to run immediately. There has to be some action by her that the umpire judges to be interference.
Did the throw from F2 merely contact the BR as she stood there being disgusted about walking? I probably have nothing, go get the ball, play on. No different from a runner advancing from 1B to 2B and being hit by a throw to the base in an attempt to make a play on her. Unless this runner does something to interfere (i.e. reaches out and knocks down the throw) this is just a bad throw go get the ball play on. But if (in BUs judgement) the BR intentionally moves into the throw or steps into the throwing lane to screen F1 taking a throw from F2. Now you probably have INT. As to OBS, if BR is impeded by F1 who does not yet have the ball then it would be OBS but as stated this does not absolve BR of being called for INT. It doesn't matter that she was an idiot for not advancing immediately she still has right of way over a defensive player without the ball. The PU has to make a judgement call, was BR just trying to advance to 1B and was impeded by F1 or did she run into F1 to break up the play at the plate. Having a foot still in the box or a foot completely out of the bbox does not matter. Judgement. |
|
|||
Quote:
Last edited by txtrooper; Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 10:04pm. |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|
![]() |
||||
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 |
interference ignored?? | newump | Baseball | 6 | Fri Jan 11, 2008 09:15pm |
ump interference | ggk | Baseball | 50 | Sun Sep 03, 2006 07:52pm |
Runner interference versus umpire interference | Jay R | Baseball | 1 | Thu Apr 28, 2005 07:00pm |