interference question

[brethobson]

our SS was 2 steps in front of the baseline, batter hit a short blooper 4 steps behind SS and towards 2nd. as the SS turns and steps (while looking at the ball the entire way), the runner on 2nd runs into her. they looked like they were hugging for what seemed hours. there were entangled for at least a second after the ball hit. SS never took her eyes off the ball. what's the ruling?

 

[SnocatzDad]

If umpire feels SS had a play on the ball, then interference on the runner, can't interfere with a fielder making a play on a batted ball. Effect-Dead ball, Runner from 2B is out, batter runner awarded 1B.

IF umpire judged this was to break up a double play, can call both out, but this has to be pretty blatant to get called.

If umpire feels there was no play on the ball (i.e. ball hit well out of the infield) could be obstruction on the SS for hindering the baserunner while not making a play and not in possession of the ball.

 

[SamG]

Snocatz...

What's the definition of "a play on the ball"? I didn't see the play, but in my mind, if the ball goes behind the fielder, they may still be the closest person to the ball. For example... put SS where the OP mentioned. Batter hits a pop-up and the ball hits and stops right on the edge of the grass/dirt. SS is the closest one to the ball, so of course is going to run to it. Is that a play on the ball? Or is the umpire supposed to make a judgment based on whether the player could get to the ball and make a play (ie: throw to 1st or 2nd for a force out)?

 

[brethobson]

thanks, a little more

ump ruled interference on SS and gave runner 3rd base, other team wanted home. i though this was ridiculous- if she catches it, which i thought she had a chance at, she actually would have had an unassisted double play as the runner at 1st was almost to 2nd.

so, if the ump rules interference on SS, does the runner get home or is she held to 3rd?

thanks much

 

[Chris O'Leary]

ump ruled interference on SS and gave runner 3rd base, other team wanted home. i though this was ridiculous- if she catches it, which i thought she had a chance at, she actually would have had an unassisted double play as the runner at 1st was almost to 2nd.

so, if the ump rules interference on SS, does the runner get home or is she held to 3rd?

If she's trying to make a play on the ball herself, and can make a play on the ball, then it's not obstruction.

If she's just moving to try to catch a throw at the 2B bag then it could be obstruction.

 

[brethobson]

runners on 1st and 2nd

runners on 1st and 2nd

 

[SnocatzDad]

Snocatz...

What's the definition of "a play on the ball"? I didn't see the play, but in my mind, if the ball goes behind the fielder, they may still be the closest person to the ball. For example... put SS where the OP mentioned. Batter hits a pop-up and the ball hits and stops right on the edge of the grass/dirt. SS is the closest one to the ball, so of course is going to run to it. Is that a play on the ball? Or is the umpire supposed to make a judgment based on whether the player could get to the ball and make a play (ie: throw to 1st or 2nd for a force out)?

IMO reading the OP the SS could have caught the ball in the air for the out so it should definitely by interference on the runner for preventing the SS from making that catch.

 

[SnocatzDad]

ump ruled interference on SS and gave runner 3rd base, other team wanted home. i though this was ridiculous- if she catches it, which i thought she had a chance at, she actually would have had an unassisted double play as the runner at 1st was almost to 2nd.

so, if the ump rules interference on SS, does the runner get home or is she held to 3rd?

thanks much

Umpires get very picky about semantics so before one of them gets on you about it, just understand that when the defense hinders the offense illegallly it's called obstruction (not interference).

Sounds like bad umpiring. When Obstruction happens you will see the umpire stick their arm out indicating a delayed call. There is no "automatic" 1 or two base award for obstruction. There is protection for the runner and once the obstruction happens the defense has lost the ability to get that runner out in between the two bases where the obstruction occurred (with a few exceptions). So if the runner attempts to go to 3B and is tagged out, the umpire will then call time and decide if she would have reached 3B safely without the obstruction or not. If the answer is yes, she's safe at 3B, if no, she's still safe, but safe back at 2B. If the runner tries to press for home and is called out on a bang/bang play again the umpire has to decide if the player would have made it ahead of the tag without obstruction or not. If the play was at home in this scenario the runner would either be safe at home due to obstruction, or out. There is no automatic protection passed the bases where the obstruction occurred. So since the obstruction occurred between 2B and 3B and runner tried for home, she lost her protection after passing 3B. If the collision is significant (i.e. player does not get up) umpire may award base she was headed to even though she didn't complete the attempt. No way umpire will award the base past the base she was headed to. Obstruction will not always get you an extra base. Runner rounding first and bumping F3 standing in the way while not making a play, isn't a free pass to 2B. It's essentially a free try because you can't get out trying, but if you had little chance to make it without the obstruction you'll just be put back on 1B if you get tagged out heading for 2B.

The exceptions to protection have to do with plays being made on other runners and or reaching the next base and them retreating, so basically there are things that can happen to remove protection. I coach runners to just make the same decisions they would if not obstructed, advance or not based on whether you think you can make it.

 

[BretMan]

What's the definition of "a play on the ball"?

Here is the definition of "a play" from the ASA rule book: An attempt by a defensive player to retire an offensive player.

In order to have "a play", there must be some reasonable expectation and opportunity for the defense to actually record an out. A batted fly ball that the shortstop had a chance to catch fits the bill. As Snocatz noted above, that is one judgment that the umpire has to make on this play- did the fielder have a reasonable opportunity to record an out? If so, and the runner prevented that, then it is interference against the runner. Dead ball, runner out, other runners return to last base held at the time of the interference.

Sight unseen, it's hard to guess if this fly ball could have been caught. You'll have to answer that question yourself! I will say this: If there is a possibility it could have been caught, I would give the benefit of the doubt to the defense.

As also noted, if the umpire judges the interference prevented a double play, a second out can be charged (in this case, the second out would be the immediately trailing runner). Generally, the double play must be probable and imminent (you don't guess at the second out). About the only way I could picture calling two on this (assuming interference was called) would be if another runner was way off base and in jeopardy of being doubled up after the catch.

One more thing to consider: If the umpire judges that the catch could have been made with ordinary effort, then the batter is also out. The rule of thumb there is that the fielder usually needs to be camped out waiting for the ball or a couple of steps away from getting under it. Otherwise, if this was a catchable ball, but catchable with greater than ordinary effort, the batter is placed on first base.

Those are the rules that cover this and the judgment the umpire has to make. I will defer to the folks that actually saw the play itself as to which way you think it should have been called!