B/r int

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

They have a retired runner interfering and we have 3 outs.

Interfering with what?

[youngump]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

Interfering with what?

The appeal. Though I agree with Chuck (at least mostly). Being where you're supposed to be and not dissolving is not interference. The running lane is irrelevant on this play though. The BR could be out of the lane and still not be guilty of interference. The running lane only applies on throws to retire the BR.

[jmkupka]

I'm glad you brought that up. The running-lane rule, as I know it, is to prevent the fielder at 1B from being interfered with a throw from home plate.
I was not sure if it pertained to the attempt to retire the B/R only.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

I'm glad you brought that up. The running-lane rule, as I know it, is to prevent the fielder at 1B from being interfered with a throw from home plate.
I was not sure if it pertained to the attempt to retire the B/R only.

The 3' lane is to prevent the BR from interfering with the ability of a defender to receive a throw at 1B, from anywhere.

I agree, this is not INT unless the retired player did something to INT. Running to 1st on a batted ball is NOT an act of INT.

[jmkupka]

Thanks guys, Mike, do you concur that the running lane is not a deciding factor in this play (because the running lane rule only pertains to retiring the B/R)? 8.2.E doesn't mention that detail.
The verbiage does read "interferes with the fielder taking the throw at first base", I do infer that to mean "the throw to put out the B/R", as opposed to "a throw at 1B"

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

I do infer that to mean "the throw to put out the B/R", as opposed to "a throw at 1B"

Why?

[Andy]

The issue is not any throw to first vs only a throw to retire a B/R, it's that you don't have a batter-runner anymore after the fly ball is caught.

The running lane is only applicable to the batter-runner. Once the fly ball is caught, you have a retired runner and that runner must commit an act of interference in order to interfere. I would say that simply continuing to run toward first base does not qualify, especially with the play and the ball behind him/her.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

Thanks guys, Mike, do you concur that the running lane is not a deciding factor in this play (because the running lane rule only pertains to retiring the B/R)? 8.2.E doesn't mention that detail.
The verbiage does read "interferes with the fielder taking the throw at first base", I do infer that to mean "the throw to put out the B/R", as opposed to "a throw at 1B"

No matter when scenario, the running lane applies only to the BR and a defender receiving a throw at 1B. The minute that ball is caught, the BR no longer exists. So, you now have a retired runner question about INT. The 3' lane would be irrelevant to the point of the rule and the umpire needs to determine if the offensive player committed an act of interference and apply 8.7.P, if necessary