Interference question

[corlay]

scenario:
Runner 1 at 1B
Batter/Runner grounds sharply to the second baseman.
Ball, Runner1, and F4 arrive at same place at same time.
Intereference is called.
F4 manages to field ball, tag Runner1 out, and throw Batter/Runner out at 1B.

Question: Is Interference an immediate dead ball? and if so, what happens to the batter/runner? Out at 1B? Safe at 1B? or Sent back to continue the at-bat?

I know with an Obstruction call play does continue to an end point. Cant remember with Interference....

[Later Edit] As a spectator I was way out beyond the OF fence (COVID rules) and didn't quite understand the play correctly. As it turns out, the Field ump never called Interference, AND the Batter/Runner was originally called safe at 1B. But then opposing coach asked the plate Ump to "help" the Field Ump. The Umps conferred, and then said the Runner1 didn't Interfere with the F4 play on the ball, but DID interfere with the throw to 1B. So they called Runner1 out (on the tag) AND Batter/Runner out (Runner1 Interference). I think this is incorrect umpire mechanics? Can you retroactively impose an Interference call, after the play has ended? Or does Interference HAVE to be called in real-time? (my thinking is that it must be called in real-time)

 

[jackfrost]

Interference is an immediate dead ball. Typically the person who interferes is out and the batter-runner is awarded 1st base. If it appears to the umpire that the collision was an attempt to break up a double play, the batter-runner can also be called out. (But usually they get 1st base.)

 

[corlay]

Interference is an immediate dead ball. Typically the person who interferes is out and the batter-runner is awarded 1st base. If it appears to the umpire that the collision was an attempt to break up a double play, the batter-runner can also be called out. (But usually they get 1st base.)

Thanks for the reply to the original question, but see new wrinkle added above...

 

[Cornbread]

I’d like interference to be a delayed dead ball to allow the defensive coach to have the option of taking the result of the play or the interference runner out batter safe

 

[jackfrost]

[Later Edit] As a spectator I was way out beyond the OF fence (COVID rules) and didn't quite understand the play correctly. As it turns out, the Field ump never called Interference, AND the Batter/Runner was originally called safe at 1B. But then opposing coach asked the plate Ump to "help" the Field Ump. The Umps conferred, and then said the Runner1 didn't Interfere with the F$ play on the ball, but DID interfere with the throw to 1B. So they called Runner1 out (on the tag) AND Batter/Runner out (Runner1 Interference). I think this is incorrect umpire mechanics? Can you retroactively impose and Interference call, after the play has ended? Or does Interference HAVE to be called in real-time?

Interference is an immediate dead ball and hope/usually get it right on the spot. But if there is any doubt and you have a partner, the umps want to get it right. So conferring and changing the call sometimes happens. If the coach said he saw something that the base umpire couldn't see from his angle, that would be a reason for the 2 umpires to get together.

Interference is a judgement call. Sometimes its obvious when you have a collision. Other times, different angles show one thing that is not seen at another angle. If the question from the coach makes sense, the umpires can get together and correct the call. The umpires SHOULD NOT get together just because the coach did not like the call.

The way the umpires changed the call is one of the scenarios i offered in my original response. If the interference was an attempt to break up a double play, you could call both runners out. Also, if the interference by the first runner happened after they were out, then you do have to call someone else out. One of these scenarios appears to be what the umpires decided in the end.

 

[jackfrost]

I’d like interference to be a delayed dead ball to allow the defensive coach to have the option of taking the result of the play or the interference runner out batter safe

That would get way too confusing for the defense and the umpires. You would have runners on base paths who already interfered. Defense would be chasing kids who are already out.

 

[Cornbread]

That would get way too confusing for the defense and the umpires. You would have runners on base paths who already interfered. Defense would be chasing kids who are already out.

That makes sense

 

[corlay]

The way the umpires changed the call is one of the scenarios i offered in my original response. If the interference was an attempt to break up a double play, you could call both runners out. Also, if the interference by the first runner happened after they were out, then you do have to call someone else out. One of these scenarios appears to be what the umpires decided in the end.

Thanks for the reply. makes sense.

I think this scenario fits your reasoning:

No (live) Interference call.
Runner1 tagged out.
F4 throw to 1B may have been influenced by Runner1 (un-intentional)
Batter/Runner called safe (live)
Play Ends.
Umps confer.
Batter/Runner called out on Interference by Runner1 (F4 throw).


Last question: The continuation of the play (after the tag of Runner1) by Runner1/F4 caused F4 to alter her throw to 1B - just by virtue of where there bodies where positioned in space.
Does this fit the definition of "an attempt to break up a double play"?
If in the Ump's judgement was there was no purposeful attempt, does that (or should it have) factor at all?

 

[Comp]

I believe the rule states it must be an obvious attempt to prevent a double play or something to that effect.

 

[The Man In Blue]

F4 manages to field ball, tag Runner1 out, and throw Batter/Runner out at 1B.

Dissenting opinion: there was no interference.