Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 1 member: TABLE SETTER 11; 60 anonymousDiscussion: interference or not?
| Posted | Discussion |
| Jan. 19, 2011 jkhs 7 posts | interference or not? Runner on third. Left-handed batter using a runner from home. (i.e., “in the hole”) non-running batter hits the ball down the first-base line, the first baseman fields the ball, touches first base and starts to throw to the catcher who is on home plate in order to get the runner from third out. The batter who has used a runner from home has failed to move out of the batter’s box (he has become a spectator at that point) and is standing directly in front of the catcher blocking the first baseman’s line of sight as well as that of the catcher. The first baseman is startled when he sees the batter still in the batter’s box and his throw goes wide so as not to hit the batter. What’s the call? |
| Jan. 19, 2011 Omar Khayyam 1357 posts | Anyone who is afforded the courtesy of having a runner from home (whatever the reason) just HAS to get out of the way. Interference—runner from third is out. |
| Jan. 19, 2011 birdie Men's 70 802 posts | jkhs, I would think that the right thing to do is get out of the way. I do not see any difference between that an a runner coming into second on a double play. The runner does not have to slide or get out of the way. If he gets hit tough luck, No interference call, unless he throws his hands up. Thanks Harry |
| Jan. 19, 2011 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | nope harry this is where i have a prol with that.once the ball has been hit,the batter needs to get out of the way b/c he is now not a runner/player.he should in no way be able to affect the play.as an ump i would prolly call an out for what he did,regardless if it was intentional or not.he needs to vacate the batter's box just as if he had been running for himself. |
| Jan. 19, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Is there a written rule on this since it is such an off-the-wall situation? |
| Jan. 19, 2011 birdie Men's 70 802 posts | Gary19, I am pretty sure that there is not a rule on this. I have only seen this one time in my playing days and it was in Fla. One team was so short of players that they asked permission to use a runner ( because of injury) from home plate. It was granted in the pool games but not double elimination. Robert, If the batter is in foul territory and still in the batters box, I would think he is still all right. There is a double line in baseball and as long as you are inside that there is no interference. I would think that rule would apply here. Thank Harry |
| Jan. 19, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | This is a judgement call. If the batter (in the umpires judgement) intentionally interferes with the throw then it's a dead ball out. If the scenario was altered in that the batter decided to run to first and the throw struck him while running it would be the same judgement call. There is no rule that specifies you have to get out of the way of a throw just like there is no rule that says you have to slide or give yourself up when your trying to run to a base. |
| Jan. 19, 2011 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | harry i think that since this batter had a runner from the plate,he needs to get out of the way as soon as possible(go straight to the fence after hitting),since he is now an extra player on the field.like i said,he should in no way be able to influence a play no matter what.i know there is no rule per say as it is not allowed for tourney's and just a league situation. |
| Jan. 20, 2011 JBTexas Men's 70 434 posts | I know it is strange but I disagree Mad Dog, Show me were in any rule book that rule is in, ask A-Rod, it maybe in the unofficial rule book(not cool) but not against any written rule. |
| Jan. 20, 2011 JBTexas Men's 70 434 posts | Sorry mad dog you correct on this, my answer was for another thread, my bad. |
| Jan. 20, 2011 birdie Men's 70 802 posts | Ok call him out for not doing the right thing by getting out of the way. I wonder what the position of the courtesy runner was and did that have any influence on the throw Thanks Harry |
| Jan. 20, 2011 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | no prol JB,we know of your sometimers condition........LOL |
| Jan. 20, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | The USSSA book specifies when a base runner is attempting to score and the NEXT batter or other team members interfere with the attempted play interference is called, the play is dead and the most advanced base runner is out. It doesn't say anything about the batter runner so I'm going to presume that the same thing applies. Again this is purely the umpires judgment if it's intentional. Another scenario that is more common, This should be easy: Runner on 1st. Base hit to right or right center. Runner on first attempts to go to third. The throw comes in from right field and strikes the runner in the back. Is that runner out? |
| Jan. 20, 2011 birdie Men's 70 802 posts | Stick8,I do not think so. He will have a sore back but will still be on third. Thanks Harry |
| Jan. 20, 2011 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | harry yep,i have been the 2b that has relayed a throw to 3rd and hit the runner.PO'd me off ,b/c if it had gotten thru he is out.as a runner i'll attempt to get in the way of the throw when it is coming in from behind me.yeah i have been hit,but i ended up safe. |
| Jan. 20, 2011 jkhs 7 posts | Here is the consensus opinion from local umpires as well as from two experienced national umpires: Once the batter has hit the ball he is not involved in the field of play - he can no longer be referred to as a batter so no batter rules apply once he has hit the ball. And, because there are no specific rules regarding runner-in-the-hole situations, that player becomes subject to the SSUSA interference rule which says “ Interference is the act of an offensive player or team member which impedes or confuses a defensive player attempting to execute a play......” |
| Jan. 21, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | Birdie you are correct. Mad Dog be careful when you do that. Some runners will look over there shoulder at the throw and try to postion themselves to get hit with the throw. Situation I had a couple years ago. I was the base umpire. Man on 1st (6-6 with long strides and very fast), one out. Grounder to second. Second baseman makes a nice play in the hole pivots and throws to second to get the force. The middle infielders relay to first hits the runner in the shoulder carroms off into the outfield. What's the call? |
| Jan. 21, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | Jkhs, I'm not going to say the umps you consulterd are wrong but it has to be in the judgment of the umpire. Take the same situation you descibe and let's say the batter runner was running to first base and the throw hit him. What would be the call? |
| Jan. 21, 2011 birdie Men's 70 802 posts | Stick, I believe that the runner is safe and no interference if he was still in the base line and did not intentionally throw his shoulder into the ball. Same situation on the second question. I believe that the runner must be inside the foul line ( like baseball 1 or 2 feet)and no intentional interference. Those question might not have been for me but I could not resist answering. Thanks Harry |
| Jan. 21, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | How is this any different than a throw hitting a base coach or a runner going into second who has just been forced out? If the runner does not intentionally move into the path of the ball, the play is just fine. |
| Jan. 21, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | Birdie your correct and always feel free to chime in. |
| Jan. 21, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | Gary19 there really is no difference. As long as the ump doesn't deem it intentional. |
| Jan. 21, 2011 Al33 Men's 55 183 posts | Gary19, Do you think it would be interference on a base coach getting hit while outside of the coaching box, provided there is a coaching box? I know in softball there usually isn't one, but usually in baseball there is. |
| Jan. 21, 2011 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | not sure stick,once he has been forced how can he stay and impede a throw to first....now if he is close enough to attempt a break up of the double play,then he should be sliding to do that,yes i know sliding is not required,but is the only legal way to make contact with someone attempting a double play.if i turn and throw to first after the force and that runner is in the way and blocks the throw going thru,why is not that interference. |
| Jan. 21, 2011 jkhs 7 posts | Here is the consensus opinion from local umpires as well as from two experienced national umpires: Once the batter has hit the ball he is not involved in the field of play - he can no longer be referred to as a batter so no batter rules apply once he has hit the ball. And, because there are no specific rules regarding runner-in-the-hole situations, that player becomes subject to the SSUSA interference rule which says “ Interference is the act of an offensive player or team member which impedes or confuses a defensive player attempting to execute a play......” |
| Jan. 21, 2011 jkhs 7 posts | I don't know how that post went up again.... At any rate the justification for the call is that the non-running batter is responsible for knowing that, with a runner on third it is likely that there will be a play at home plate and is as responsible as any other offensive player in the area (for example the on-deck batter) for being clear of the possible/probable play area. It's not surprisiing that there are so many philosophies on this board because the game I'm describing is strictly senior rec league where rules of safety supersede most others. |
| Jan. 21, 2011 garyheifner 649 posts | Trust me, I never want to see anyone injured in this great game. The 1st baseman must fire that ball home to the catchers glove/target. If the guy wants to take one in the chest or head for the team, well that's his choice. I have a feeling the guy will throw up his hands at the last second to defend himself and then you have interference. If he ducks, then the out is completed. |
| Jan. 21, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | In baseball where there is a designated box, then yes I would think interference could be called. But only to the extent that it affected the play. It would not be automatic. mad dog, that is only interference if the runner who is now out moved himself into the path of the throw. But he is not obligated to get out of the way. Though throwing right through him will usually teach him not to do that again. Gary, you got that right. If he wants to stay in the way he is fair game. |
| Jan. 22, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | Mad Dog unless in the umpires judgment he intentionally interfered there is no interfernce. There is no rule that says he has slide or get out of the way of a throw. Only that you can't crash into a defensive player attempting to make a play or intentionally interfere--throw your hands to block a throw or move your body to get in the way of a throw. If he's in the line of the throw he's fair game to be hit |
| Jan. 22, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | stick, I do believe you are 100% correct on this one. |
| Jan. 22, 2011 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | yes stick for all but the not getting out of the way of a throw,to me once that runner is forced,he has no right to be in the baseline,or to the base,if that is my line of throw,to me he is interfering with a play to made.from all i ever have seen that has been called interference.what if that same runner can get no more than 3 steps or so from 1st and decides to take the hit on a relay throw,from the middle inf to 1st,what is that call.to me that is the same if he is 3-4 steps from 2b,interference on him,for purposely blocking the ball from getting to first. |
| Jan. 23, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | Again Mad Dog there is no rule that specifies a runner has to get out of the way of a throw. It's only if in the umpires judgment the runner intentionally interferes. Let's look at it from another perspective. Man on first, 1 out. Batter hits a ground ball to the second baseman, he flips to second for one. Let's say instinctively the ss knows he can't get a dp because the batter-runner is a fast runner. So cleverly he relays toward first, striking the runner going from first to second who had veered off the baseline. By your view that would be a dead ball dp with the lead runner being out. Why penalize the offensive team because the batter runner in this case was too fast to double up? |
| Jan. 23, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | stick, he just is not getting it. But nice tries. |
| Jan. 23, 2011 birdie Men's 70 802 posts | I have never had and interference call go in my favor since I have been playing the game. I learned a long time ago that the runner coming into second does not have to slide he has the option of taking in the face or getting out of the way. The reason baseball players slide not only to break up a double play but to save their faces. I used to try and put the ball right over their left shoulder and next to left ear. The runners soon learn that there was little room for error. They soon were in right field or would slide. I was at one time a second baseman. Thanks Harry |
| Jan. 23, 2011 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | stick no you don't penalize for that type of play,also in your case the runner is attempting to get out of the way.i'm not saying there is a rule for the runner to move out,but as a player who no longer belongs on the base paths after being forced out(not talking about him being close enough to attempt to break up the play),how can you say it wasn't intentional that he took the throw into him to stop a double play,unless the runner is that stupid that he gets hit.i have also seen it where the runner has committed the interference but it wasn't called b/c the ump said just what you have said,batter runner was gonna be safe no matter(he hadn't crossed first yet),i didn't agree of course b/c it was actual interference,but hey. we had always been told to get the interference you must throw,now a days it is the umps discretion,and you don't have to throw,just make the attempt that you want to,and even sometimes not even that.as i see it your trying to penalize the defense for that runner's act of not getting out of the way,but that is just me. i have also seen runners take umbrage on the throw birdie is talking about(as i have played both middle inf spots a lot of my life)and even had them say do it again and we fight,well my reply was always,well maybe you should be more careful,LOL. oh well thanks for the discussion,good for the blood pressure,LOL. |
| Jan. 23, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Do it again and we fight? If the infielder does it right, the runner takes it in the head and then what kind of a fight does he put up? |
| Jan. 24, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | Birdie, unless I'm mistaken in baseball when a runner slides in to break up a dp at second he can slide away from the bag but his reach must be able to at least touch the bag. If the slides way off the bag where he can't reach it then it's an automatic dead ball dp. |
| Jan. 24, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | Mad Dog I'd say about 99% of the players would get out of the way (who wants to risk getting konked in the head?) but again there is no rule that specifies that. It's solely the judgment of the umpire. |
| Jan. 24, 2011 birdie Men's 70 802 posts | stick8, I always thought that was the rule. I think that it pertains to SS more because of how they come across the bag towards right field. I have seen them be 4 or more feet off the bag into right field and the runner cannot go after them. The runner has to have some type of contact with the bag. Thanks Harry |
| Jan. 24, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | Birdie your right about it being the ss. Another potential issue comes in to play. Some shortstops are so anxious to get out of the way of an incoming runner sliding that they'll sweep the second before they actually catch the ball. Unless it's blatant it's a call that you don't see a whole lot. Looking at replays it happens more often than one would think. |
| Jan. 24, 2011 #6 Men's 60 1173 posts | birdie, I agree with the 2nd post you put above this one, I have been playing ss for many years, and in baseball have been taken out countless times, I was "TOLD SEVERAL TIMES BY THE UMPS", in senior softball , the runner does not have to slide "or" get out of the way, throw the ball and if he gets hit, its interference, double play ! In senior league, nobody wants to hurt anyone as some of us still work, but after being ran into several times with the umps doing nothing, I started throwing the ball, seems like the problem stopped, for now ! |
| Jan. 24, 2011 birdie Men's 70 802 posts | #6, It is funny to me how different umps interpret different rules. I have been told to throw the ball but never been told that if it hits the runner it is interference. Thanks Harry |
| Jan. 24, 2011 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | birdie, I thing that is because not all rules are cut and dry and neither are the plays. Add to it the umps rarely move out from behind the plate to make calls and you end up with a bunch of questionable ones. |
| Jan. 24, 2011 birdie Men's 70 802 posts | When I could run I always went hard into second base to break up a double play!!! I gave as good as I got. Now whenever I run for myself,I just drift into right field when I do not have a chance of breaking up two or being safe. I do believe that the older and slower that you get the safer you become. The fast guys that are left who KNOW how to how to play the game will slide. The non baseball playing guys do not get out of the way and wounder why you buzzed their ear or gave them a forearm to protect yourself. OH WHAT MEMORIES. Thank Harry |
| Jan. 24, 2011 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | birdie,in norcal they have a run thru rule(nccsa),no sliding,(at least they used to).as a SS i don't drift way out,i touch the LF side of the bag with my front foot and throw from back there,i have idiots come thru on the INF side of the bag(i'm saying they good of easily touched the bag with a foot) and run into my arm(reason i hate the run thru rule)and get crappy about it when i tell them if it happens again i'll drill them,and yes this was senior guys and not kids. when i turn a DP specially when i play 2b,i don't look for a runner,i just turn and throw and it is up to them not to get hit.i will not alter my turning of 2 for an idiot player or someone who thinks they can get over and get me to stop and not throw.if the runner gets hit,he will have to blame himself..... |
| Jan. 24, 2011 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | No longer the case Bob |
| Jan. 24, 2011 birdie Men's 70 802 posts | mad dog, I think that you have finally gotten the point!!! The runner is at his own risk. There is no interference if he gets hit. He is just an idiot. Let's play two. Thanks Harry |
| Jan. 26, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | Birdie your correct except if the runner throws his hands up to try and deflect a throw or shifts his body to get in the way of a throw--both of course in the umpires judgment. |
| Jan. 26, 2011 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | i still think if i turn and throw a ball and the runner does not allow my throw to go thru to 1st,he is interfering with my attempt at a play for 2.JMO.... |
| Jan. 26, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | Mad Dog in a house league rec level game I'd probably call it that way because it would be the "politically correct' call to make. In a tournament level game I'd have to look and see if the runner intentionally interfered with your throw. |
| Jan. 26, 2011 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | stick the way i look at it,is if he doesn't let the throw go thru,he is intentionally trying to block it,whether he throws his hands up,moves his body and such or not,as if he didn't the play could be made for 2.just my thought on it. i know and understand the rule,but just saying. |
| Feb. 4, 2011 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | Stick8-as usual you are right on the money about one of the most misunderstood calls in softball. Too many guys feel it is an automatic call. It has to be intentional. I do expect, though, if I am half way there and out by so far that I don't have a chance of getting within 4 or 5 steps of second base, that if the throw hits me, it will be deemed intentional on my part. You know as a runner that you have plenty of time to 'drift' toward right field. The umpire just has to make sure the throw was not intentionally made at the runner that was way out of the base path. As to the guy that took umbrage to the throw coming too close to him and threatened to fight.....well, there are just some guys--you know? What did he expect? |
| Feb. 4, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | The other thing to consider is I don't believe there is an automatic interference call made even if the runner is intentionally in the way. If in the umpire's judgement the second runner would have beaten the throw he is not called out just because the first runner was in the way. |
| Feb. 4, 2011 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | Gary-the rule does not specify that it is interference only if the runner would have been out. That would be putting way too much gray area into the rule. To make an umpire also decide if the runner would have been safe is too unwieldy. How much is enough-one step, two steps? Would there have been a strong throw or a weak one and would that have made a difference at first. No-it either is interference or it isn't. |
| Feb. 4, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Webbie, I see what you are saying but am not sure that is the case. Just like if a fielder impedes the progress of a runner, the runner is not automatically given the next base if the umpire does not believe he would have gotten there without the interference. No one gets to prosper from interference calls, they just don't get penalized for what would have been theirs. |
| Feb. 4, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | Mad Dog if it was a rec level house league game I'd probably call interference but in a tournament game I'd have to determine if it was intentional or not. Here's a play I had umping about 4 years ago: Bases loaded, no outs. Batter hits a one hopper to third. Third baseman made a nice play stepped on third for one, threw home to the catcher who stepped on home for two and the catcher threw back to third who tagged the runner going from 2nd to third. What's the call? |
| Feb. 4, 2011 JBTexas Men's 70 434 posts | double play, can't be a triple play because can't get the same guy out twice. Runner going to third was already forced when 3Bman touched bag. |
| Feb. 4, 2011 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | nope looks like 1 out as the runner going home is not out by force,(unless it is a senior game)as the force has been taken off by the 3b when he touched the bag only forcing the runner going from 2b to 3b.thats the way i see it.to get the out at home the catcher needed to tag the runner coming home. |
| Feb. 4, 2011 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | JB assumed senior game and is right in that instance. Mad dog assumed not senior ball and is right that way. Nice play-stick8-what was your call? Gary-impeding the progress of a runner is interference if he goes to the next base whether the umpire thought he would have made it or not. A smart runner or coach seeing the umpires hand is up-silent call-will go to the next base and will get the call. Gamesmanship play! Stick8-just like to get things right-do you agree with my assessment on the runner interfering with the throw? |
| Feb. 4, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Webbie, not necessarily. I have seen cases where a runner was impeded coming around third and stayed at third, then argued he should have been automatically awarded home. The ump said "no, you would not have safely made it anyway" and he was not going to give the runner something he would not have earned. Yes that is judgement, but most of what an ump or any official does is. |
| Feb. 4, 2011 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | webbie thats why i put senior in parenthesis. yep if i see an ump throw that arm out there while running i keep going to the next base no matter. to me if the runner has no chance to break up the DP and stays in the base line to impede the throw to first,he is interfering,regardless if he does anything but stand there. |
| Feb. 4, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | Gary19 that's an interesting scenario and one that is not always understood. In your scenario (as with a batter runner rounding first) the runner should have kept going home and if the ump knew the rules then he would have awarded the runner home--all presuming the runner accidently bumped into the third baseman and not the base coach. Since the runner went back to third there is no interference. |
| Feb. 4, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | JBTexas & Mad Dog I should have specified it was a men's game, not a senior game. My fault on that one. In this play the defensive team thought they had a triple play. I called one guy out (runner from second to third) and didn't say a word while the play continued. Then the defensive team ran into their dugout celebrating what they thought was an apparent triple play, the runner on third scored, the runner on first scored and the batter scored. When the play was over I walked to the dugout told the team 3 runs in, 1 out and they had to go back on the field. They argued and argued. First they said the runner on third didn't score (he did), then they said the same runner interfered (he didn't), then they said the runner from second to third deliberately fooled them because he was walking in the field of play (after being forced out he was walking to his dugout which was on the third base side). Wasn't really a heated argument because I fully explained to the manager why which I think he understood. |
| Feb. 4, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | JBTexas, if that play happened in senior ball it could turn into a double play. That would depend if the runner from third had crossed the commit line while the catcher had the ball standing on home plate. Or if the runner did not score at the scoring plate but instead touched the original home plate |
| Feb. 4, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | Webbie your correct. While I do know what the ump in Gary19's scenario was getting at the real rule is no interference because that runner went back to third instead of continuing to home. All the ump did by saying what he did was doing the guy a favor but that's not rule based. |
| Feb. 4, 2011 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | Wow, stick8-you must have had quite a rhubarb on that faux-triple play. Nice call! Gary-the runner HAS to continue to the next base to be awarded the base. It is not interference if he goes back to the previous base. Hey, stick8-I enjoy (and I bet a lot of others do) situational scenarios like the one you just put out. Would you be interested in starting a thread with some of your most interesting ones? Thanks for the input! Even if you think you know the game pretty well, there is always something that you haven't heard! |
| Feb. 4, 2011 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | stick isn't it,if the ump doesn't think he should be at the next base he can just put the runner back at his previous base,heard something like that one time.i'm not talking about a runner who goes past the first base he comes to when the ump puts his arm out for interference,kind of trying to get an extra base.i do know that if the runner goes for that extra base he can be subject to be out,then... |
| Feb. 5, 2011 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | Mad dog-once the umpire indicates the interference has happened, the runner is not in jeopardy if he goes for the next base. However, if he goes back, he does not get the next base automatically. It is a silent call, but the umpire sticks his arm out to indicate it has happened. Once he has called the interference the runner cannot be called out at the next base. |
| Feb. 5, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | Webbie it wasn't a bad rhubarb. It was more of a confusing thing at first because it happened so quick. After the play was over I explained to the team the call and they eventually understood. They were more peeved that the man on first and the batter scored on the play. And yes I wouldn't mind sharing situations I've encountered as an ump and as a player in a new thread. I'll bring back the "old Spice Presents: You Make the Call" title. And your last sentence rings ever so true. For me, the more I read the more I'm convinced that I'm ignorant of things. For instance (not softball related) I never realized Australia is nearly the same size as the United States. |
| Feb. 5, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | Not really sure what your getting at mad dog. If an ump puts his arm out for interference the runner gets the next base only if he attempts to go to that base. If he retreats back to the base he previously touched then there is no interference. Umps shouldn't make calls based on what they feel a result might be. A throw could be wild, the defensive team might miss the throw, drop the ball on a tag attempt or perhaps the throw might end up to the wrong base. Or the runner may trip and fall while running, slide past the bag and be tagged out. Umps cannot account for this. |
| Feb. 5, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | stick, that might all be true, but should the ump automatically give the runner a base that he would not have earned even if the interference did not occur? Not every interference actually stops a runner from successfully advancing. |
| Feb. 5, 2011 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | stick what i'm trying to get across,is yes the runner needs to go to the next to get it i agree with that,when there is interference and not go back.what if the ump then decides even with interference he thinks the runner would not of made it,does he send the runner back or not.i have seen that,with the explanation yes there was interference but he would not have been safe tho even if there was none,so he is not out,but does have to go back.i have also seen and had umps tell me on the turning of a DP that they will not call the batter/runner out if they think he would of been safe at first without the interference.i am with you tho in thinking once it has been called or done,the defense should be penalized for it. |
| Feb. 7, 2011 Maj + player 16 posts | if you gentalmen are refering to senior softball rules, ssusa rulebook, you should read the definition of interference. 1.43 of the book states,the act of an off. player or team member which impedes or confuses a def. player attempting to execute a play.a base runner must get down, better known as sliding, or get out of the way of the fielder making the play. i have umpired many ssusa events and i know this is the rule. i hope this will help you guys out. |
| Feb. 7, 2011 Maj + player 16 posts | another thing, it is not a judgement call by the umpire at first base. interference is a dead ball and if it is called, the double play is completed. if there is no outs out and a runner on third at the time of the play, the runner closest to home is to be called out for the second out. in that case, you would have your two outs and still have a runner on first. this part of the call is different in diff. assoc. ssusa doesn't spell this part out very well but you can not let that guy from third score on the inter. call. either call him out or send him back to third and take you out at first. |
| Feb. 7, 2011 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | Maj + player-as I said in an earlier post I expect to be deemed intentionally interfering if I am in the way of the throw, but suppose, as the runner going from first to second, I veer out into the outfield and the throw hits me there? That is where the ump has the latitude to not make the automatic call on interference. But, yes, you bring up a point we hadn't touched on-that in an interference call the out is called on the runner closest to home. |
| Feb. 7, 2011 SOFTBALL6 18 posts | Gentlemen, I think some of you are confusing interference with obstruction. Interference is the offensive player interfering with the defensive players ability to field or throw the ball (such as the runner going into second standing up). This is a judgement call by the umpire and is a dead ball situation. Obstruction is the defensive player impeding the runner and is a delayed dead ball situation. Most umpires will require the runner to attempt to go to the next base before awarding the base. I have seen situations where the runner has collided with the first baseman in his basepath and because of the collision, the runner had to crawl back to first. Sometimes the umpire will award an additional base if he thinks the runner would have had an easy double. Either way, it's a judgement call as most of them are. |
| Feb. 7, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Webbie, great point. Otherwise let's all just haad-hunt the guy going from first to second just to claim interference and get the free and undeserved out going from third to home. Such a silly rule. How much more can the senior game be dumbed-down? |
| Feb. 7, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Oops, that should be head-hunt. |
| Feb. 7, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | Gary19 to answer your question: No. If interference didn't occur then the runner isn't awarded a base. |
| Feb. 7, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | Gary19 to answer your question: No. If interference didn't occur then the runner isn't awarded a base. |
| Feb. 7, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | Mad Dog, only speaking in USSSA (SSUSA might be different) in your first scenario it doesn't matter if the ump thinks the runner could or could not make it to the next base. Interferece is interference. I've never heard of an ump sending a runner back to a base when interfernce is called because he felt that runner wouldn't have made it. In your second scenario, I presume interference occurred and if so the lead runner is also out--if there is one. If it's only a man on first then it's an automatic dp. Whether the batter runner is fast enought o beat out that or not is irrelevant. As I specified this is USSSA and much of it is based on judgment. SSUSA and other associations might be different. |
| Feb. 8, 2011 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | ASA is a bit different with their rules,i ahve had an ump tell me,"well you couldn't of made the throw in time,so B/R at first is safe",as usual my response is"how do you know" |
| Feb. 8, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | Good question Mad Dog. |
| Feb. 9, 2011 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | Mad dog=that's why it either is interference or it isn't and whether the runner would have been safe or not is a meaningless point. |
| Feb. 9, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Webbie, I am not so sure about that. Why should the defense benefit from a play in which they had no chance to get the batter/runner anyway? Sort of like in football, there is no interference if the pass is deemed uncatchable even if there was contact with the receiver. Otherwise, on a slow-developing play in which I see I have no chance to get the runner at first I might as well just hit the runner coming into second in hopes I get a gift call from the ump. |
| Feb. 9, 2011 stick8 1991 posts | Not only that Gary19 but a fielder could conceivable "muff" a throw and strike a bat from the batting team that's outside the dugout or strike a player that's outside the dugout. |
| Feb. 11, 2011 jim16 Men's 65 180 posts | Interference is a call TOTALLY left up to the umpires judgement. The batters physical body has to exist and as long as he isnt doing anything wrong he shouldnt be called for interference. If the umpire rules interference, its interference and if not, its not interference. No protest is allowed and regardless of what actually happened, the umpires judgemet stands. |
| Feb. 11, 2011 #6 Men's 60 1173 posts | jim16, Have you fallen off the face of the earth ? Trying to get you to call Tim at Tanel ! |
| Feb. 14, 2011 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | I was just addressing the interference call itself, not variations on a theme.If you call interference, there is a penalty and the runner is out, not maybe out if he would have been safe. If a muff or like happens, or a delay you don't make the call unless you plan on applying the penalty. Stick8 for future reference, let me know if I'm wrong on this. Never have had it happen. |
