Dropped third strike play

[srpat38]

To me, it seems to be interference. The defense *should* know the situation as well as the offense. The catcher was obviously confused by the batter, so I think interference.

 

[Comp]

To me, it seems to be interference. The defense *should* know the situation as well as the offense. The catcher was obviously confused by the batter, so I think interference.

The rule and case plays have been posted several times, it is not interference.

 

[BucketDud]

Interference is any act, either physical or verbal
…. Running in Front of fielder and jumping over a ground ball, without any contact can be ruled interference.
a runner not forced who is standing on second yelling “3,3,3” to top a fielder rom taking the easy out at first is definitely interference.

Is there any circumstance in which the runner can make contact with a fielder trying to make a play on a groundball and it not be interference? Watched this happen between couple of DD games few weeks ago. 2B charges groundball and runner from first collides with her, but base ump says everyone safe.

There was a big discussion and ultimately the umpire stuck with his decision it was not interference. Not certain what the reasoning could have been other than simply not understanding the rule?

 

[BB875]

The debate is interesting. As a coach I have never seen this called as interference. I can only imagine if the batter waited until she realized the runner was in jeopardy of getting out (between bases) and then took off to first base attempting to draw the throw. That would be clear in my opinion.

Good learing moment for coaches. Get that runner to 2b early in the count (before you have 2 outs). Keep 1st base unoccupied so a drop 3rd can help your team on offense.

 

[The Man In Blue]

The debate is interesting. As a coach I have never seen this called as interference. I can only imagine if the batter waited until she realized the runner was in jeopardy of getting out (between bases) and then took off to first base attempting to draw the throw. That would be clear in my opinion.

Good learing moment for coaches. Get that runner to 2b early in the count (before you have 2 outs). Keep 1st base unoccupied so a drop 3rd can help your team on offense.

When I coached rec, that was the #1 priority. I preached keeping first base open since U3Ks were so common.

 

[The Man In Blue]

Is there any circumstance in which the runner can make contact with a fielder trying to make a play on a groundball and it not be interference? Watched this happen between couple of DD games few weeks ago. 2B charges groundball and runner from first collides with her, but base ump says everyone safe.

There was a big discussion and ultimately the umpire stuck with his decision it was not interference. Not certain what the reasoning could have been other than simply not understanding the rule?

Can I explicitly explain it to you? No, as these are usually HTBT moments (Had To Be There).

However, yes, there are a few possibilities:

1.) The "trainwreck" is generally accepted with a batter taking off and the catcher coming out to field the ball. "That's nothing!" is the prescribed umpire mechanic . . . it signifies you saw it and are allowing it.

Some umpires will try to extrapolate that to areas of other fielders, but by the letter of the law, it should not be.

2.) I would say an umpire might judge it was too early to protect the fielder (ehhh . . . )

3.) The umpire may be protecting another fielder, as only ONE fielder can receive that protection. I believe there was a recent MLB or NCAA play where F3, F2, and F1 were all converging on a ball and the runner contacted either F1 or F3, however the umpire felt F2 had the play and that is who he was protecting.

 

[eddieq]

Pseudo relevant content occurs here:

Community 15U last night

1-2 count, runner on third. Ball in the dirt, gets past the catcher. I call a ball, roll my indicator wheel, clear the catcher, etc. getting ready for a call at home. Runner steals home safely, moves off, I reset, batter steps in, and I announce "last pitch was a ball, count is 2 balls, 2 strikes" and the batter looks back at me and says, "But I just got here". I look up and there is what is supposed to be the current batter standing on first. In all the confusion, she "stole" first. Brought her back to finish the at bat. Everyone had a chuckle at least.

 

[BucketDud]

Can I explicitly explain it to you? No, as these are usually HTBT moments (Had To Be There).

However, yes, there are a few possibilities:

1.) The "trainwreck" is generally accepted with a batter taking off and the catcher coming out to field the ball. "That's nothing!" is the prescribed umpire mechanic . . . it signifies you saw it and are allowing it.

Some umpires will try to extrapolate that to areas of other fielders, but by the letter of the law, it should not be.

2.) I would say an umpire might judge it was too early to protect the fielder (ehhh . . . )

3.) The umpire may be protecting another fielder, as only ONE fielder can receive that protection. I believe there was a recent MLB or NCAA play where F3, F2, and F1 were all converging on a ball and the runner contacted either F1 or F3, however the umpire felt F2 had the play and that is who he was protecting.

The only other possibility I thought of is the fielder not attempting to field or throw after contact.

Several years ago had a scenario runner stealing third batter steps out of the box and gets in way of catcher. I assumed she was out, but fortunately for us the umpire didn't know if the batter or runner was out so called over EIC. In that discussion he asked about the throw and umpire said she didn't make it because batter in the way. EIC states catcher has to make an attempt to be interference so both runners were safe.

I'm guessing that wouldn't apply in this situation either? If fielder gets run over hard to make an attempt.

 

[The Man In Blue]

The only other possibility I thought of is the fielder not attempting to field or throw after contact.

Several years ago had a scenario runner stealing third batter steps out of the box and gets in way of catcher. I assumed she was out, but fortunately for us the umpire didn't know if the batter or runner was out so called over EIC. In that discussion he asked about the throw and umpire said she didn't make it because batter in the way. EIC states catcher has to make an attempt to be interference so both runners were safe.

I'm guessing that wouldn't apply in this situation either? If fielder gets run over hard to make an attempt.

An attempt, yes . . . an attempt does not mean a throw has to be made as long as the umpire believes the catcher held up because of the batter. Bad call, Blue. (I know that because I've kicked that one before.) Requiring the throw will result in catchers popping batters.

As for who is out, who interfered? Were they already out? If not, then they are out. (In this case, the batter is out and the runner goes back.) If they were already out, then we look for the next person on our list . . .

 

[Big Daddy Michigan]

This is an area that there should be a rule change. I know the defense should know the rules and count but the offence shouldn't get a benefit for not knowing (or even worse knowing and trying to exploit the situation). I would make it a dead ball all runners return to previous base if you run on in either with < 3 strikes or try and run with 1st base occupied < 2 outs. At higher levels it's not that common but it happens enough at low levels that it's worth a simple rule change.

So what the hell do you do when a slapper swings and missed a pitch in the dirt for strike two, but based on the fact that she's on a sprint toward first-cuz she's a slapper- the catcher who is cluless throws to first, meanwhile the runner on second steals third?


If you're calling this a dead ball then the runner can't steal because the catcher doesn't know the situation.