Interference

[MTR]

OK, so we are 14u ASA nationals and a similar play happened. Runner on 2nd, ball hit to ss Runner jumps over ball ss makes error all runners safe. No call is made by umps. 3 man umpiring crew in correct position. Before next pitch, other coach makes protest. Umps conference, 1st base ump says he saw contact, calls runner out. Seems like I have read that a judgement call like this is not protestable, is this correct ?

Not that it matters, but runner says she was not with in a foot of the ss.


nationals

My question is if the umpire saw interference, why didn't the umpire call interference? This is the type of thing that confuses players, coaches and fans about what they think is a reversal of a call.

INT should not be one of these "give me more information" things. If you see INT, you call INT. If you did not see it, you don't call it now, after the play or after the game.

 

[tghorley]

Thank you MTR for expressing what I did not. After 8 days at nationals for us old men, we kind of get tired and lose any train of thought.

When the umpires conferenced after the play, the 1st base umpire said he saw the runner make contact with the runner. Why didn't the 3rd base ump have a much better view than he did?

Edit: Could any umpire make the call immediately?

 

[Ajaywill]

Thank you MTR for expressing what I did not. After 8 days at nationals for us old men, we kind of get tired and lose any train of thought.

When the umpires conferenced after the play, the 1st base umpire said he saw the runner make contact with the runner. Why didn't the 3rd base ump have a much better view than he did?

Edit: Could any umpire make the call immediately?

Any umpire that sees interference can call interference. However, an umpire across that diamond from the play may be reluctant to make that call if his partner(s) is much closer to the play.

What most people don't realize is that just because an error was made, that is not enough reason to call interference. As the players move up in level and skill, there is a reasonable expectation that the ability and focus to field a ball and make a play should be there despite a runner being in very close proximity to the fielder.

What may be interference at 10u could easily not be interference at 18u.

No offense to the player referenced in the OP, but had she made the play and got the out in spite of the runner being right there, we wouldn't even see this post.

 

[tghorley]

Any umpire that sees interference can call interference. However, an umpire across that diamond from the play may be reluctant to make that call if his partner(s) is much closer to the play.

I agree with you 100%,but imo, they should not reverse the call after the play either.

What most people don't realize is that just because an error was made, that is not enough reason to call interference. As the players move up in level and skill, there is a reasonable expectation that the ability and focus to field a ball and make a play should be there despite a runner being in very close proximity to the fielder.

Again, I agree. This was 14u, that transition year where most fielders are not quite there yet.

What may be interference at 10u could easily not be interference at 18u.

No offense to the player referenced in the OP, but had she made the play and got the out in spite of the runner being right there, we wouldn't even see this post.

I'm just the glad play really did not affect the game either way!

 

[MTR]

I agree with you 100%,but imo, they should not reverse the call after the play either

"They" didn't reverse any call.

The crew got together and shared information which never should have been necessary. While Ajaywill may be correct about an umpire at a distance, if an umpire saw interference (and I'm not talking about guessing what "may have been"), s/he should make the call. In this instance, that umpire should have been relatively close in the "B" position, but should have been moving to his left away from an advantageous angle for a potential play @ 1B. Meanwhile, the umpire at 3rd, should have had a great look up the base path at the runner passing F6.