2 rare calls, same game

[jmkupka]

So if R1 broke for home, it would've been correct?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

So if R1 broke for home, it would've been correct?

Probably, but not necessarily yet. Did the extraneous runner interfere with a play is the question. Breaking for home ... not yet. They might still head back upon a throw home. But if they interfere with a play, then yes.

[jmkupka]

This is along the lines of a base coach running down the 3B line & drawing a throw. It would be more of an impulsive act by the thrower, seeing a running non-teammate out of the corner of her eye and throwing.
The note of the rule doesn't seem to require an "act' of interference besides the running itself.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

This is along the lines of a base coach running down the 3B line & drawing a throw. It would be more of an impulsive act by the thrower, seeing a running non-teammate out of the corner of her eye and throwing.
The note of the rule doesn't seem to require an "act' of interference besides the running itself.

True... but in all honestly this is not a call that is made very often.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

True... but in all honestly this is not a call that is made very often.

Once every 26 years for me.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

So if R1 broke for home, it would've been correct?

WHERE does the rule state that the possible play must be on a runner advancing? If the ball is live and a runner is off the base, a play is available.

The retired player continued to run and drew a throw while there was another runner who was still active.

If you want to wait to see what happens, how long to you wait? How many steps or distance from a base must a runner be before you make a decision?

[jmkupka]

True... in my case F2 could have taken the shorter route & fired to 3B instead, if not for the retired BR's distraction (interference).

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

WHERE does the rule state that the possible play must be on a runner advancing? If the ball is live and a runner is off the base, a play is available.

The retired player continued to run and drew a throw while there was another runner who was still active.

If you want to wait to see what happens, how long to you wait? How many steps or distance from a base must a runner be before you make a decision?

Mike, the play I'm envisioning is the catcher with the ball, the runner slowing at 3rd - obviously no play at 3rd. F2 sees a runner heading for 2nd and fires. Surprised runner at 3rd sees the throw, takes a step or two toward home with the ball in the air, and decides not to go. There was never a play that was interfered with here.

Obviously, there ARE situations where a play is available --- but deciding which are which is part of why we are there. A runner one step off 3rd with a catcher that's obviously not throwing to third is not going to be played on in real life, so i would not call that an available play. Do you disagree?

[jmkupka]

Say F2 airmails the throw into centerfield, allowing R1 to trot home... that throw would never have made absent the violation.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

Say F2 airmails the throw into centerfield, allowing R1 to trot home... that throw would never have made absent the violation.

Was the throw still because of the violation? Then, why different?

[jmkupka]

I'd say the throw, good or bad, was due to the violation, in my explanation to the OC.

And I did.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Mike, the play I'm envisioning is the catcher with the ball, the runner slowing at 3rd - obviously no play at 3rd. F2 sees a runner heading for 2nd and fires. Surprised runner at 3rd sees the throw, takes a step or two toward home with the ball in the air, and decides not to go. There was never a play that was interfered with here.

I'm not envisioning anything, just reading the OP. It clearly states the runner rounded 3rd on the throw home, not to 2nd. That is an active runner in jeopardy.

Obviously, there ARE situations where a play is available --- but deciding which are which is part of why we are there. A runner one step off 3rd with a catcher that's obviously not throwing to third is not going to be played on in real life, so i would not call that an available play. Do you disagree?

I WOULD have to see it, but if you want to work with supposition, how do you know it was obvious C wasn't throwing to 3B if her attention and throw was drawn by the retired player? I've often seen a catcher make a throw to 3B when it seemed obvious there was no play. But what may seem obvious to you may not be to the catcher, OR the runner who make get caught sleeping.

As noted, HTBT, but the team violating the rule should not get the benefit of any doubt.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I'm not envisioning anything, just reading the OP. It clearly states the runner rounded 3rd on the throw home, not to 2nd. That is an active runner in jeopardy.



I WOULD have to see it, but if you want to work with supposition, how do you know it was obvious C wasn't throwing to 3B if her attention and throw was drawn by the retired player? I've often seen a catcher make a throw to 3B when it seemed obvious there was no play. But what may seem obvious to you may not be to the catcher, OR the runner who make get caught sleeping.

As noted, HTBT, but the team violating the rule should not get the benefit of any doubt.

So I'm a little confused on your take on this. (And frankly it's always been a little obscure). So if the runner is not in jeopardy at the time of the throw (laying on the ground having just slid into third and not even getting up), and then the offense draws an illegal throw to second and then the runner from third gets up and runs home, do you have interference? And how long can you wait? For example, suppose the throw goes into center field but the runner is still getting up so she doesn't move yet and then the center fielder misplays the throw that never would have happened and now the runner goes home.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by youngump

So I'm a little confused on your take on this. (And frankly it's always been a little obscure). So if the runner is not in jeopardy at the time of the throw (laying on the ground having just slid into third and not even getting up), and then the offense draws an illegal throw to second and then the runner from third gets up and runs home, do you have interference? And how long can you wait? For example, suppose the throw goes into center field but the runner is still getting up so she doesn't move yet and then the center fielder misplays the throw that never would have happened and now the runner goes home.

I'm addressing the play at hand where a play may have been available. In you scenario in SP, if the only active runner is laying on the ground or just standing on the base, I'm killing the ball. I'd probably do the same thing in FP.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I'm addressing the play at hand where a play may have been available. In you scenario in SP, if the only active runner is laying on the ground or just standing on the base, I'm killing the ball. I'd probably do the same thing in FP.

Me too.

Honestly, this exact scenario has always felt like a hole in the rules. At the moment the throw is made on the retired runner, there is no play available... thus no interference. But the poor throw CREATED a play, and created an advantage unintended by the rules. I've come across this exact scenario three times. Once when I was relatively new, and the more experienced PU killed the play immediately and we discussed in post game. Once when I was the experienced guy - and I killed the play ... and discussed post-game. And once when I was UIC at a tourney - the younger guys let play continue and no one protested so it didn't come to me... until the post game.

Seems this could clearly be written into the rules or at least be given a case play.