Interference call at home on runner who just scored?

[Dabears17]

Its 8u, so I'm not going to lose anymore sleep over it, but had an interesting play in an 8u tournament this weekend. Other team was being hyper aggressive on base paths, standing a couple feet off the bag and racing to next base as soon as the ball was released by the infielder to go back to the pitcher.

Runner a couple steps off third, a runner had just scored and was in the process of retrieving the bat a couple feet in front of home plate. Ball is thrown back to pitcher, runner takes off from home, pitcher throws home that lands at the catchers feet and runner scores.

HC goes out and requests the interference call on the player retrieving the bat. Runner who had just scored was bent over a couple feet in front of home plate to a foot or two to the first base side.

Umpire wouldn't call interference. What should of the call been?

 

[SoCal_Dad]

Hard to tell from the description provided. Where was the catcher positioned in relation to the plate and the runner picking up the bat (R1)?
- Did the defense have an opportunity to make the play (i.e. reacted in time to get an out)?
- Was the throw good enough for the catcher to make the play?
- Did R1 impede or hinder the catcher and, if so, how?

 

[Dabears17]

Throw was a slightly poor throw and except for being within 3-5 feet of home, R1 didn't actively interfere. Catcher was behind, to slightly on the 3rd base side of home.

I'm not the HC, but I think the umpire said something like unless the throw home hit R1, there was no interference.

I had it drilled in my head as a rookie AC you don't go get the bat until the pitcher has the ball in the circle and all the runners are back on base and you are sure the play is over.

I would hope coaches that teach their girls to run that aggressively would teach them to stay out of the way of any plays at home.

I umpire rec games, so I was also curious what the correct call should be in case it comes up in one of my games.

 

[eddieq]

Well, there has to be interference for there to be an interference call. If the runner in question did anything to interfere with the opportunity for an out (even if her presence made the throw go offline), then you have int. Runner closest to home is out. Everyone else goes back.

Of course, whether she interfered is entirely up to the judgement of the umpire there on the field. Based on my interpretation of your description, I likely have nothing there.

 

[SoCal_Dad]

Well, there has to be interference for there to be an interference call. If the runner in question did anything to interfere with the opportunity for an out (even if her presence made the throw go offline), then you have int. Runner closest to home is out. Everyone else goes back.

Please clarify the highlighted portion because it seems contrary to what other umpires have posted on these boards.

 

[Comp]

A runner who has scored coming back into live ball territory and getting in the way of a throw is different than a runner legally running the bases who has just been put out and is still running toward the base they were headed.

 

[eddieq]

Please clarify the highlighted portion because it seems contrary to what other umpires have posted on these boards.

A runner who has scored coming back into live ball territory and getting in the way of a throw is different than a runner legally running the bases who has just been put out and is still running toward the base they were headed.

Thanks Comp. Exactly. I'm not talking about a retired runner between first and second on a double play situation. Once she scored, she still can't go poof, but now she's done something else - returned toward the plate to retrieve the bat. If her doing that caused the defense to alter where they wanted to throw the ball, you can have interference.

 

[SoCal_Dad]

A runner who has scored coming back into live ball territory and getting in the way of a throw is different than a runner legally running the bases who has just been put out and is still running toward the base they were headed.

I presume you meant fair territory...

Thanks Comp. Exactly. I'm not talking about a retired runner between first and second on a double play situation. Once she scored, she still can't go poof, but now she's done something else - returned toward the plate to retrieve the bat. If her doing that caused the defense to alter where they wanted to throw the ball, you can have interference.

Actually, I was thinking about plays where B-R is outside the running lane. My recollection is the defense still has to make a quality throw in that case. I guess that could be due to that rule's wording of B-R interfering with the fielder making the catch.

 

[Comp]

I presume you meant fair territory...

I actually did, but doesnt really matter if it was fair or foul territory. A runner who has scored cannot interfere with the defenses ability to make a play. Per the original post, if a coach is going to have their team be that aggressive at baserunning, they should also be teaching the runners to stay completely out of the way after scoring.