Interference by Retired Runner

[bbsbvb83]

NFHS Rules

With R1 on third base & R2 on first base and no outs, B3 hits a ground ball to F5. F5 throws to F4 to retire R2. R2 goes into second base standing up and contacts F4 who is positioned on the bag and is about to make a throw to first base.

Do you consider this a no-brainer interference call?
Does it matter whether or not F4 had a legitimate opportunity to throw out B3?
If you make the interference call, are you ruling out R1 or B3?

[RKBUmp]

No I dont consider it a no brainer interference call. There is no requirement to slide. It may be interference, it may not be depending on the situation and umpires judgement.

There must be an available play to have interference. If the batter/runner had already touched 1st base, or was clearly going to beat any possible throw to 1st base there is no possible play.

If it is judged to be interference, then a retired runner has committed interference and the runner closest to home would be out also.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by bbsbvb83

NFHS Rules

With R1 on third base & R2 on first base and no outs, B3 hits a ground ball to F5. F5 throws to F4 to retire R2. R2 goes into second base standing up and contacts F4 who is positioned on the bag and is about to make a throw to first base.

Do you consider this a no-brainer interference call?

Not necessarily, since the runner is not required to slide, and is allowed (even expected) to attempt to beat the throw. However, just as she may not overslide to be a legal slide, her running through the base isn't a valid attempt to be safe, either. Contact alone is possibly legal, but it needs to be a case where she is clearly stopping at the base in her attempt to be safe after choosing to not slide.

Originally Posted by bbsbvb83

Does it matter whether or not F4 had a legitimate opportunity to throw out B3?

As stated by RKBUmp, there has to be a "play" for there to be interference.

However, I am more leaning to any possibility of a play; at the instant the interference occurs, you don't know if B3 will fall down before reaching 1st, or if she will even fail to touch 1st with a possible live ball appeal available to the defense. I wouldn't be too quick to judge she would clearly beat the throw!!

Originally Posted by bbsbvb83

If you make the interference call, are you ruling out R1 or B3?

Common misapplication of the rule. If R2 is already out when she interferes, it ALWAYS the runner closest to home that is out, R1 in this case. The only times you would rule B3 out is if 1) she is the only other runner, or 2) R2 interferes BEFORE she is out, with the obvious intent to stop a double play. This (#2 above) isn't R2 interfering AT the base, it's her obviously and intentionally interfering with the batted ball, the fielder fielding the batted ball, or the fielder throwing the batted ball to 2nd before the initial out is recorded.

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

Not necessarily, since the runner is not required to slide, and is allowed (even expected) to attempt to beat the throw. However, just as she may not overslide to be a legal slide, her running through the base isn't a valid attempt to be safe, either. Contact alone is possibly legal, but it needs to be a case where she is clearly stopping at the base in her attempt to be safe after choosing to not slide.


As stated by RKBUmp, there has to be a "play" for there to be interference.

However, I am more leaning to any possibility of a play; at the instant the interference occurs, you don't know if B3 will fall down before reaching 1st, or if she will even fail to touch 1st with a possible live ball appeal available to the defense. I wouldn't be too quick to judge she would clearly beat the throw!!



Common misapplication of the rule. If R2 is already out when she interferes, it ALWAYS the runner closest to home that is out, R1 in this case. The only times you would rule B3 out is if 1) she is the only other runner, or 2) R2 interferes BEFORE she is out, with the obvious intent to stop a double play. This (#2 above) isn't R2 interfering AT the base, it's her obviously and intentionally interfering with the batted ball, the fielder fielding the batted ball, or the fielder throwing the batted ball to 2nd before the initial out is recorded.

We had this one at a clinic on video.

ZERO OUT: R1 on 3rd, R2 on first. B3 bunts the ball in the air on a suicide squeeze play. The ball goes off F1's glove, hits the dirt and is picked up, is thrown to F6 at second for the out on R2. R2 runs into F6 without attempting to avoid contact, while F6 is attempting to throw to 1st base for the out on B3, who seeing the popup never ran towards 1st base until the ball dropped.

By the time the contact occurred at 2nd base, R1 had already touched home.

What is the call? The umpires on the play called R2 out on the force at second and B3 out on the interference by a retired runner. R3's run counted because at the time of the interference, she had already touched home.

[UmpireErnie]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

We had this one at a clinic on video.

ZERO OUT: R1 on 3rd, R2 on first. B3 bunts the ball in the air on a suicide squeeze play. The ball goes off F1's glove, hits the dirt and is picked up, is thrown to F6 at second for the out on R2. R2 runs into F6 without attempting to avoid contact, while F6 is attempting to throw to 1st base for the out on B3, who seeing the popup never ran towards 1st base until the ball dropped.

By the time the contact occurred at 2nd base, R1 had already touched home.

What is the call? The umpires on the play called R2 out on the force at second and B3 out on the interference by a retired runner. R3's run counted because at the time of the interference, she had already touched home.

I don't think this is entirely correct. I agree that if R1 from 3B has already reached home by the time the contact happened at 2B then the "runner closest to home" would be batter-runner assuming that the umpire is judging that the contact did constitute INT.

But I don't agree that this run scores. As I read your play the INT judgement was because there was a possibility of a play at 1B on B3 who had not yet reached 1B. When B3 is declared out for the 3rd out of the inning prior to reaching 1B no run may score on the play. It's not a timing issue.

Small wrinkle: let's say B3 had run on the popped up bunt and she had rounded 1B and the INT by the retired runner happens when F6 tries to get B3 who is diving back into 1B. Now R1s run would count as R1 crossed prior to the third out and that third out was not by the batter-runner prior to reaching 1B.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by UmpireErnie

I don't think this is entirely correct. I agree that if R1 from 3B has already reached home by the time the contact happened at 2B then the "runner closest to home" would be batter-runner assuming that the umpire is judging that the contact did constitute INT.

But I don't agree that this run scores. As I read your play the INT judgement was because there was a possibility of a play at 1B on B3 who had not yet reached 1B. When B3 is declared out for the 3rd out of the inning prior to reaching 1B no run may score on the play. It's not a timing issue.

Small wrinkle: let's say B3 had run on the popped up bunt and she had rounded 1B and the INT by the retired runner happens when F6 tries to get B3 who is diving back into 1B. Now R1s run would count as R1 crossed prior to the third out and that third out was not by the batter-runner prior to reaching 1B.

There were no outs to start the play.

[UmpireErnie]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

There were no outs to start the play.

Duh! Read too many plays lol. Of course since B3 is the 2nd out the run scores.