how would you ruled this?

[nealwallen]

Please look at the link for the video.

The situatin is one out with a runner on first.

WARREN - HUNTERDON - WEST MORRIS ASA - (Flemington, NJ) - powered by LeagueLineup.com

there is no right or wrong answer, just looking to see how you would of ruled this.
Thanks

 

[nealwallen]

Go to WHAT'S THE CALL?

 

[canyonjoe]

The batter is of course out. I say live ball and the runner on first is safe.

 

[CoogansBluff]

I'm not an ump, so just guessing -

Runner safe at first. Batter was not in fair territory and therefore was not guilty of interference.

 

[SoCalASABlue]

Batter is out. Runner is safe.

 

[chinamigarden]

Does the fact that the batter turned to look at the catcher and then moved into the throw count for anything? Does the running lane apply to retired batters, or only runners who have not yet been thrown out? I can easily see this being interference and both outs recorded.

 

[T Red]

I don't see how they called interference at all, the b/r had her back to the catcher before the catcher threw the ball. What is she suppose to do disappear?

 

[YOCOACH]

I have to agree with chinamigarden. Batter out and BR out due to interference even if the batter was out already. Looked to me as if the interference or, non-interference as the case may be, was intentional.

 

[chinamigarden]

I don't see how they called interference at all, the b/r had her back to the catcher before the catcher threw the ball. What is she suppose to do disappear?

Actually there are times in games when yes, the player is supposed to just disappear (see Boston obstruction in MLB playoffs). But more then anything else they should also not turn into a throw.

 

[Rocketech1]

Both runners out. Batter/baserunner looks back and sees the ball is going to be caught and drifts into the path of the throw (whether or not it was intentional doesn't matter) and thereby interferes with the play. Had the batter/baserunner continued on to first base without peeling off to the right, the catcher probably has a clear throw to first and no interference would have been called since the catcher caught the ball in foul territory and is three or four feet outside the line. FYI - I'm sure MTR will chime in and rip us all