Was definitely inerference

[Alsmygal]

Ok, I saw a situation that was just simply new to me and was hoping to get a second opinion here.

We were simply watching a game where a runner ran home and was safe....no play at the plate....and she went to pick up the bat from the field of play when the second runner was running home. She did interfere with the play at the plate and was in the way of the pitcher trying to flip the ball to the catcher to get the second runner out at home. The defense was still successful even with the interference and made the out on the second runner, which was out number two for the inning.

The umpires met to discuss the situation and they called the player that interfered out along with the runner that got out at home....run was taken off the scoreboard.

Like I said, I had never seen a play like this happen, but I thought that the interference call would've just meant that if they did not make the out on the second runner, then because of the interference, she was out. I've never seen them call an additional out and erase a run that had already scored before the play took place.

Coaches never argued anything and they went ahead and took the field after they umpires discussed it, so it wasn't like it was a big blow-up situation or anything like that.....it was just a new and different situation and if it ever happens to come up again, I just want to be sure I understand the rules completely.

Thanks!

 

[James Smith]

Once the batter touches home the run counts, there is no backtracking that play is over.

It was good they discussed it but they came up with the wrong decision.

 

[Alsmygal]

Once the batter touches home the run counts, there is no backtracking that play is over.

It was good they discussed it but they came up with the wrong decision.

So should there have been two outs given on the play? The runner was out on the tag at the plate and then they called the interfering player out as well even though the interference did not change the outcome of the play at the plate.

 

[James Smith]

Just 1, a runner scored. That play is done.

She interfered with another play so that runner is out, she is fine and run still counts and is not out.

Edit: I know it was not at this level but eject her from the game if you want, you are not allowed to call her out after the fact.

 

[Comp]

Interference by a retired runner or a runner who has already scored is a dead ball, runner closest to home is out, all other runners return to the last base touched at the time of the interference.

 

[MTR]

If the umpire believed it was INT, it is an immediate dead ball, really shouldn't be anything to discuss.

There may be some who think it doesn't make a difference because they got the out anyway. Well, the umpire should make the call, not only make sure of the out, but it also freezes any other runners.

As others have noted, you cannot rule a runner who has scored out if they have interfered.

 

[Umpireernie]

There may be some who think it doesn't make a difference because they got the out anyway. Well, the umpire should make the call, not only make sure of the out, but it also freezes any other runners.

Yes, and there is no reason to allow play to continue to see if the defense still makes the play. As soon as the offense commits INT, the ball is dead at that instant. When INT happens someone is out, usually the person who committed the INT but if that person has scored or has been put out then the runner closest to home (in this case the runner being played on but it might not always be the case) is the one declared out.

 

[Umpire]

Just 1, a runner scored. That play is done.

She interfered with another play so that runner is out, she is fine and run still counts and is not out.

Edit: I know it was not at this level but eject her from the game if you want, you are not allowed to call her out after the fact.

Obviously it wasn't at this level and I think it odd you would even mention it. What level would it have to be to eject her? What was your thought in mentioning this?