An Even Number of Umpires Making the Call
 

R1 on 3B, no outs. I am base umpire in C position. BR hits a soft grounder up the 1B line and it is fielded by F3. BR stops on baseline maybe 15-18 feet out of the batter's box (I am charging into the diamond). F3 throws to F2 who makes a late tag play on the scoring R1, ruled safe by my partner. At the same time as the throw from F3 to F2, BR steps back towards home. (NCAA 12.2.11)

Both my partner and I came up with Dead Ball at the same time. Since he was closer than me to the BR, and he is generally louder, he administered the call and I backed off. BR out, R1 goes back to 3B, no run scores. No one complained about anything and the game went on.

Here's my question: which umpire has primary coverage of the BR interference on that situation? Is it the base umpire (who has responsibility of the BR to 3B) or the plate umpire (who is closest)? CCA Manual isn't specific in this case, but does offer a general guideline that the umpire closest to OBS/INT makes the call. Did I step on his call?

Interference (or obstruction) is one of those calls where if you see it, you call it. I don't think, technically, either of you have "full jurisdiction" on this particular brand of interference.

I must be missing something, if F3 threw to F2 for a play on a runner advancing to home, a play is no longer being attempted on the batter/runner so why would she be guilty of interference for stepping backward?

The two actions (throw to home and the backwards step away from F3) were basically simultaneous. I should have included that detail in my original description.

I guess my question now is, did F3 ever intend or attempt a play on the batter/runner or was the play strictly to home? The rule says to delay or avoid a tag, if F3 never attempted to play on the batter/runner and was always throwing to home Im not seeing where this is interference.

In my judgment, yes. F3 was closing the distance to tag the standing-still BR when she noticed the R1 coming in to score. F3 was so close to the BR when she threw that I couldn't believe she was giving up on the easy out...I got caught ball-watching a little bit for the play at the plate, then noticed the BR had moved back with the throw.

Edit: The point of the post was to figure out what the wisdom of the crowd said about the calling responsibility. The way it unfolded I think it would have been clear to other umpires that the BR was delaying her approach to 1B to avoid the tag/put-out and allow R1 to score. This, of course, was completely legal until she stepped back toward home plate. It's hard to communicate all the nuances of that happened in those 2 seconds in text online.

Then you've kind of changed the play --- the batter-runner must be stepping back TO AVOID A TAG in order to be guilty of interference. If they was no tag attempt happening when they moved backward, this is nothing.

Based on these words alone, this is not INT.

By your own words, at the moment the batter-runner moved backward, F3 was attempting a throw, not a tag. "Delaying her approach to 1B" is completely legal (heck ... it's good baserunning).

If backing up without a tag attempt were INT, a heads-up BU could do it if she saw her teammate from 3B was about to be thrown out at home. Worst that could happen would be runner returns to 3B (less than 2 outs of course )

Must have been working with azbigdawg.....

sorry... I meant a heads-up BR...

Very perceptive, Andy.

:eek::eek::D

Looks like the crux is " the BR had moved back with the throw"; which seems to mean a tag was not being attempted.

Back to the mechanics question, I believe the BU has primary responsible for most of BR; but the OP implies pretty close to HP, like a swipe tag in the first half of HP to 1st is usually the PU call.
Of course, as said " see it, call it" for INT or OBS.

BTW, not necessarily a NCAA answer.

To answer the OP... I may have stepped on your toes, but it was right in front of me. So if we got it wrong by the book it is my fault. But we looked damn good on that call.