I've been hearing or seeing some interesting ones lately. I appreciate everyone's help.
ASA Rec 12u, one umpire
Watching a game between one of our league's 12u teams and another league's 12u team. Nobody on, nobody out, visitors (other league) up to bat. B1 lines one into the gap in right-center field. As she rounds 1B, she's obstructed by F3 who has turned to watch her teammates chase the ball. The umpire signals the obstruction and the runner continues to 2B. As the batter is rounding 2B, F8 retrieves the ball and overthrows her cutoff (F4). F6 is near 2B and the ball gets by her as well. In fact, the ball is on a direct line to F5 straddling 3B. The ball bounces directly behind BR1 and rolls directly ahead of her. At almost the same moment that she looks down at the ball, it slows down considerably and she kicks it while running to 3B. She kicks it ahead of her to F5. Ball and runner arrive at the base at almost the exact same time, and I see a tag applied. Umpire calls BR1 out on what I thought was a close play. Turns out he actually called her out for interference (kicking the ball). Offensive coach wasn't happy. Between innings, we discussed the play. He said that he felt that she intentionally kicked the ball and that he got that from when she looked down at the ball. I know this sounds like a HTBT scenario, but I was there, and I saw what he saw. I don't think there was enough time between the ball getting in front of BR1 and her kicking it while in motion in that direction for her to develop the intent to kick the ball. I think that was further evidenced by the fact that she kicked it straight to F5 and making it a close play. I went to the rulebook to try to support my stance, but all I can find is ASA Rule 8-7-J-3:
THE RUNNER IS OUT when a runner interferes with a thrown ball.
or ASA Rule 8-2-F-3:
THE BATTER-RUNNER IS OUT when the batter-runner interferes with a thrown ball while out of the batter's box.
Am I missing something, or is he correct? Is he correct because of his judgment on intent? If so, does the call change if intent is not present?
ASA Rec 12u, one umpire
Watching a game between one of our league's 12u teams and another league's 12u team. Nobody on, nobody out, visitors (other league) up to bat. B1 lines one into the gap in right-center field. As she rounds 1B, she's obstructed by F3 who has turned to watch her teammates chase the ball. The umpire signals the obstruction and the runner continues to 2B. As the batter is rounding 2B, F8 retrieves the ball and overthrows her cutoff (F4). F6 is near 2B and the ball gets by her as well. In fact, the ball is on a direct line to F5 straddling 3B. The ball bounces directly behind BR1 and rolls directly ahead of her. At almost the same moment that she looks down at the ball, it slows down considerably and she kicks it while running to 3B. She kicks it ahead of her to F5. Ball and runner arrive at the base at almost the exact same time, and I see a tag applied. Umpire calls BR1 out on what I thought was a close play. Turns out he actually called her out for interference (kicking the ball). Offensive coach wasn't happy. Between innings, we discussed the play. He said that he felt that she intentionally kicked the ball and that he got that from when she looked down at the ball. I know this sounds like a HTBT scenario, but I was there, and I saw what he saw. I don't think there was enough time between the ball getting in front of BR1 and her kicking it while in motion in that direction for her to develop the intent to kick the ball. I think that was further evidenced by the fact that she kicked it straight to F5 and making it a close play. I went to the rulebook to try to support my stance, but all I can find is ASA Rule 8-7-J-3:
THE RUNNER IS OUT when a runner interferes with a thrown ball.
or ASA Rule 8-2-F-3:
THE BATTER-RUNNER IS OUT when the batter-runner interferes with a thrown ball while out of the batter's box.
Am I missing something, or is he correct? Is he correct because of his judgment on intent? If so, does the call change if intent is not present?
Last edited: