Interference after crossing the plate?

[guero_gordo]

Situation came up tonight:
Runners at 1B,2B. Ball hit to CF, throw home to try for a play at the plate on the first runner.
Throw goes wide on the 3B side, C turns to go after the ball, but is impeded by the runner that just scored, so second runner also scores.

The first runner turned toward her dugout(3B side) after crossing the plate, but in doing so put herself directly in C's chosen path to the ball.

To me it looked like INT had taken place, because C has the right to go to the ball but a runner has no right to any particular path after having crossed the plate(if they are considered a runner at all).

PU made no call, coach made no protest, so the most likely answer is that I am wrong, but curious nonetheless.

 

[RubberBiscuit]

Like IP's this is one of the two most mysterious areas of SB application of rule. Oh I am sure somebody here will gnatz-azz provide a rules interpretation but to me this and IPs will always be a random outcome based on the particular ump and how they are feeling that day.

 

[quincy]

Ummm…

I do not know the rule but unless the player intentionally interfered with the play I think she is OK. The runner has her rights of the field until she goes into the dugout.

I think we have all seen a C pushing a runner out of the way to get to the ball. It is a contact sport.

 

[MTR]

Speaking ASA

This is definitely HTBT, but it sounds like it could be INT. (8.7.P) Players must be cognizant of the play around them and avoid interfering with the ongoing play.

It should be noted that the umpire must judge that the impediment actually prevented the catcher making a play (that requires the possibility of an out) on another runner.