- Feb 7, 2014
- 555
- 43
Is interference something that can be appealed ?
Interference Appeal ?
- Thread starter YoungBuck
- Start date
Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch
Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.
- Mar 1, 2013
- 419
- 63
Do you mean appeal that the interference that was called was not interference? Or appeal that a runner interfered and you didn't get the call?
INT is a judgement call, so it's not really appealable. As the coach, you may certainly request time and have a civil discussion with the umpire about why a call was made or wasn't made.
Just as an FYI, an appeal has to do with some type of infraction which occured on the field which must be ruled on after the fact by the umpires and requires some type of request by the offended team.
What many generally refer to as an "appeal" when they ask umpires to discuss a call is not an appeal at all. It is a request by a coach of the umpire who made the call to confer with their partner on some aspect of they play they may not have seen or a possible missaplication of a rule. It is entirely the calling umpires decision as to if they choose to confer with their partner or not.
What many generally refer to as an "appeal" when they ask umpires to discuss a call is not an appeal at all. It is a request by a coach of the umpire who made the call to confer with their partner on some aspect of they play they may not have seen or a possible missaplication of a rule. It is entirely the calling umpires decision as to if they choose to confer with their partner or not.
- Feb 7, 2014
- 555
- 43
The scenario that played out this weekend:
Runner on each base... batted ball towards the second baseman. The second baseman stopped her movement to the ball so as not to collide with the runner and went around the backside of the runner to field the ball. All of the runner's advanced including the batter due to the delay fielding the ball.
Our team's coach questioned that it was interference. The plate umpire just shook his head no and play continued.
Runner on each base... batted ball towards the second baseman. The second baseman stopped her movement to the ball so as not to collide with the runner and went around the backside of the runner to field the ball. All of the runner's advanced including the batter due to the delay fielding the ball.
Our team's coach questioned that it was interference. The plate umpire just shook his head no and play continued.
- Mar 1, 2013
- 419
- 63
Not having seen it - it sounds like it could be ruled as interference since the fielder checked up to avoid a collision. But, there are also times when a fielder will just camp there, waiting for the ball to come at them when charging the ball would have either gotten them the play or drawn an interference call. As you described, the fielder started for the ball, checked up to avoid the collision, then went after the ball again. I'd call that INT.
SOME (read not all) umpires will require some sort of contact before they'll call interference or obstruction. It's not required by the rule, though.
And, I just ready comp's reply. He's absolutely correct. Even umpires will often refer to that as an "appeal" when it's not technically an appeal. I've had partners who would say something along the lines of "are you accepting the appeal" when I would approach them for help on a call. Maybe they think it makes them sound more official. I'd rather just have the private conversation, get his input and move on.
SOME (read not all) umpires will require some sort of contact before they'll call interference or obstruction. It's not required by the rule, though.
And, I just ready comp's reply. He's absolutely correct. Even umpires will often refer to that as an "appeal" when it's not technically an appeal. I've had partners who would say something along the lines of "are you accepting the appeal" when I would approach them for help on a call. Maybe they think it makes them sound more official. I'd rather just have the private conversation, get his input and move on.
With respect to an honest-to-goodness appeal play, as defined in the rule book, there are only four kinds of appeals.
1) A missed base.
2) A base left too soon on a caught fly ball.
3) Batting out of order.
4) A runner attempting to advance to second base after overrunning first base.
Only these four instances require the defense to appeal to the umpire before the umpire can rule on them. Anything else is...something else.
A team might "appeal" to an umpire to confer with his partner, or "appeal" that a runner wasn't out, or "appeal" to an umpire's sense of good judgment, but none of those are "appeal plays" as defined by the rules. Generically, they are all just "asking for a different opinion because we don't agree with the call".
1) A missed base.
2) A base left too soon on a caught fly ball.
3) Batting out of order.
4) A runner attempting to advance to second base after overrunning first base.
Only these four instances require the defense to appeal to the umpire before the umpire can rule on them. Anything else is...something else.
A team might "appeal" to an umpire to confer with his partner, or "appeal" that a runner wasn't out, or "appeal" to an umpire's sense of good judgment, but none of those are "appeal plays" as defined by the rules. Generically, they are all just "asking for a different opinion because we don't agree with the call".
- Feb 7, 2014
- 555
- 43
What's unfortunate in plays such as the one I described is that if you don't get the interference call you're teaching the lesson that contact is necessary. Do we really want kids knocking each other down to get the attention of the umpire? The second baseman in this situation is tiny, but my DD is big - she'll probably hurt your kid...
- Feb 3, 2011
- 1,880
- 48
Interference on a runner on a batted ball would be an immediate dead ball call if either umpire had seen it. About the best you could hope for after a requested conference is that you built a little rapport with the umpire.
It's not that umpires are teaching us that contact is necessary to draw that call, but what they are teaching is that the majority of calls go to the more aggressive team. Regardless of sport, this is almost always the case.
It's possible your umpire got this call wrong, but hopefully this helps your fielders with their development.
It's not that umpires are teaching us that contact is necessary to draw that call, but what they are teaching is that the majority of calls go to the more aggressive team. Regardless of sport, this is almost always the case.
It's possible your umpire got this call wrong, but hopefully this helps your fielders with their development.
As my DD's old HS coach used to yell at his fielder's when they backed off from a batted ball due to a runner-- "You own the baseline!!!
Our team's coach questioned that it was interference. The plate umpire just shook his head no and play continued.
I am in total agreement with the PU on this--in this situation I have nothing--the runner just ran as she is supposed to and did nothing unusual to interfere with the play.
BTW--asking one umpire to "go for help" is not considered an actual appeal- it's-just a request.
Our team's coach questioned that it was interference. The plate umpire just shook his head no and play continued.
I am in total agreement with the PU on this--in this situation I have nothing--the runner just ran as she is supposed to and did nothing unusual to interfere with the play.
BTW--asking one umpire to "go for help" is not considered an actual appeal- it's-just a request.
Last edited:
I have seen runners stop dead and screen the fielder's vision without being called for interference.
