Infield Fly

[jmkupka]

Bases loaded, no out, pop up directly over 1B line. "Infield Fly if fair"... BR interferes with F3's catch attempt as the ball hits BR over fair territory.

We now have 2 outs and R1 is removed from 3B, correct?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

Bases loaded, no out, pop up directly over 1B line. "Infield Fly if fair"... BR interferes with F3's catch attempt as the ball hits BR over fair territory.

We now have 2 outs and R1 is removed from 3B, correct?

Definitely not, and ... not enough information.

I'll let you find the appropriate rule, but 2 things - a DP is contingent on the umpire's judgement, which you don't supply... and if BR interfered, the ball never hit BR - the play ended at the moment of interference.

[jmkupka]

Is the (no longer) BR not now a retired runner interfering with a play?

OK, let's look at it this way...

a) Runners stick to their bases as ball lands on the ground (after BR & F3 collide) or

b) Ball skips off F3's glove (after BR & F3 collide) & rolls further infield, chaos ensues, R1 is able to score.

Just wanna see a new thread here

[youngump]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

Is the (no longer) BR not now a retired runner interfering with a play?

OK, let's look at it this way...

a) Runners stick to their bases as ball lands on the ground (after BR & F3 collide) or

b) Ball skips off F3's glove (after BR & F3 collide) & rolls further infield, chaos ensues, R1 is able to score.

Just wanna see a new thread here

If you want to go to the trouble of reasoning it out, the BR is not retired until the ball becomes fair. So no he's not a retired runner interfering with the play.
But you don't have to go to that trouble. It's 8-2-I.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by youngump

If you want to go to the trouble of reasoning it out, the BR is not retired until the ball becomes fair. So no he's not a retired runner interfering with the play.

Correct.

But you don't have to go to that trouble. It's 8-2-I.

Actually, it's 8-2-F. The ball is dead at that instant. The events that would lead you to 8-2-I happened after the ball was dead - and thus didn't happen at all.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

Is the (no longer) BR not now a retired runner interfering with a play?

OK, let's look at it this way...

a) Runners stick to their bases as ball lands on the ground (after BR & F3 collide) or

b) Ball skips off F3's glove (after BR & F3 collide) & rolls further infield, chaos ensues, R1 is able to score.

Just wanna see a new thread here

NOTHING that happens after BR and F3 collide matters. The ball's already dead.

[IRISHMAFIA]

I see the scenario has already changed a couple times, so nevermind

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I see the scenario has already changed a couple times, so nevermind

It's not changed at all.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

It's not changed at all.

Nothing in OP about a collision. Nothing in OP about ball hitting ground or glove.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Nothing in OP about a collision.

"BR interferes with F3's catch attempt" Yes, "interferes" could mean runs up and yells in her ear ... but I think the most likely meaning of the OP here is that she ran into F3... clarifying afterward that it is a collision we're talking about is not a change. In any case, clarifying that it's a collision doesn't change the answer either.

Nothing in OP about ball hitting ground or glove.

Because it didn't hit ground or glove ... it hit BR. And who it hits after the collision is completely immaterial - plays already dead.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

"BR interferes with F3's catch attempt" Yes, "interferes" could mean runs up and yells in her ear ... but I think the most likely meaning of the OP here is that she ran into F3... clarifying afterward that it is a collision we're talking about is not a change. In any case, clarifying that it's a collision doesn't change the answer either.

Because it didn't hit ground or glove ... it hit BR. And who it hits after the collision is completely immaterial - plays already dead.

AFAIK, the original INT in the OP WAS the BR being hit with a fair batted ball.

Also, with the runners "stuck" to their respective base at the time the ball becomes dead eliminates a 2nd out since there is no possible play. However, if for some ridiculous reason any of the runners attempted to advance and there was a possible play had the retired BR not interfered, the 8.7.P may come into effect.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

AFAIK, the original INT in the OP WAS the BR being hit with a fair batted ball.

Also, with the runners "stuck" to their respective base at the time the ball becomes dead eliminates a 2nd out since there is no possible play. However, if for some ridiculous reason any of the runners attempted to advance and there was a possible play had the retired BR not interfered, the 8.7.P may come into effect.

I agree with that ruling.

I guess I read the OP differently, with "BR interferes with F3's catch attempt" meaning contact between fielder and BR, and then BR getting hit by the ball.

I do see, upon re-reading, how you took it that it was the BR getting hit by the ball that WAS the interference. (Same ruling though, right?)

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

and if BR interfered, the ball never hit BR - the play ended at the moment of interference.

Mike,

Let's go from here based on the INT occurring prior to the ball hitting the BR, or actually the retired BR.

Based on the assumption that the ball was over fair territory at the time of the INT, that player is retired.

IMO, the IF is in effect as soon as the umpire declares to be so since there is not an "oops, nevermind" option. I believe the assumption that when called, the ball is fair unless it is determined to be foul at a later point in time. The ball becoming foul after the declaration is basically the exception as opposed to the rule. Regardless, in the OP even if the ball is foul, the BR is out, there is no other option with an INT call.

That being a possible case on point, would not the only question be is whether the defense was deprived of the opportunity to retire another runner because of the INT.

[EsqUmp]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

Bases loaded, no out, pop up directly over 1B line. "Infield Fly if fair"... BR interferes with F3's catch attempt as the ball hits BR over fair territory.

We now have 2 outs and R1 is removed from 3B, correct?

The BR is out as soon as the umpire declares the infield fly. At the point, the BR's right to run cease. The BR is now a retired runner. The only remaining question is whether her actions after being declared out hindered the defense from continuing to field the ball and execute another play. If the offense was able to advance solely as a result of the ball hitting the retired BR and ricochetting away, then the answer would most likely be yes.

In that the IFF was declared, you are saying that it was a ball that could have been caught with ordinary effort. Base runners simply do not tag up on an IFF, especially when the defender is less than 60 feet from home plate.

[jmkupka]

Irish, sorry for clouding the issue with the ball possibly going foul... it didn't.
I only described it as directly over the line in order to put the BR's running path, the ball, and F3 all on a collision path.
And it is probably the only ball location in which the BR could get in the way.