Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 2 members: Golfman, TABLE SETTER 11; 136 anonymousDiscussion: umpire interference
| Posted | Discussion |
| Jan. 11, 2018 roco36 5 posts | umpire interference A base path umpire interfered with our second baseman as he attempted to catch a soft line drive. The field umpire did not call "umpire interference" and the home plate umpire let the play stand with runners on first, second and third. The home plate umpire said the field umpire was "part of the field" and let the winning run score. Another site said the field umpire should have called umpire interference on himself and allowed the batter-runner to go to first. What about the other runners? Are they free to run or allowed to run freely , or just one base? Thanks |
| Jan. 11, 2018 DaveDowell Men's 70 4312 posts | This isn't specifically covered in the SSUSA Rule Book, but here's an excerpt from the UmpireBible web site ... Obviously, the answer involves a two-umpire system, based on the hilarious comment made in parentheses at the end ... "...[W]here an umpire is touched by a batted ball before the ball touches or passes an infielder, call interference on yourself immediately. Call "Time! That's interference!" Award the batter-runner first base. Other runners advance only if forced. (Your partner is laughing by now. Do what you can to recover your dignity and move on)..." |
| Jan. 11, 2018 B.J. 1105 posts | roco... well the HP umpire got it 1/2 right.. the umpire is considered part of the field..the proper call would be determined by the position of the base umpire when he was hit by the batted ball.. if he was in front of the defense when hit then it is just as Dave stated per the Bible... if he was just behind the defense when stuck then it is a live ball play on |
| Jan. 11, 2018 DaveDowell Men's 70 4312 posts | B.J. ... I would propose that the HP umpire got it completely right for the hypothetical presented ... It's inconceivable that the umpire would run into the 2B from behind on a soft line drive ... But if that's what happened, then the 2nd part of the determination would be in the mix ... |
| Jan. 11, 2018 B.J. 1105 posts | Dave, you are correct, I mis-read the OP and then your explanation of the umpire being hit by a batted ball is what I was answering... if the base umpire makes contact with a defensive player during a play you have nothing..it is considered incidental contact.. play on |
| Jan. 11, 2018 DaveDowell Men's 70 4312 posts | B.J. - The absolutely most accurate part of any of the replies was the parenthetical remark from the UmpireBible ... I just want to know if his umpire partner had already fallen over from laughing or not! ... I nearly did! In the interest of an accurate ruling, though ... The matter of incidental contact between an umpire and a fielder (this hypothetical) is the "part of the paying field, play on" ruling ... If the umpire contact is with a batted ball, then your analysis is accurate and the correct ruling ... |
| Jan. 14, 2018 roco36 5 posts | Thanks for your comments. The umpire did not fall over laughing because he has no sense of humor. He also doesn't know where to position himself either. He was actually in front of our 2nd baseman and didn't move fast enough to get out of the way. His BMI is way over 30, in other words, it doesn't appear that he goes to Weight Watchers. |
