Register or Sign In to remove these ads
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
BrianC14

Interference? Why or why not?

37 posts in this topic


Register or Sign In to remove these ads

I would think NOT INT. INT with a thrown ball would need to be intentional here. Holliday thought Moreland tagged 1B before the throw to 2B.He was simply returning to 1B to avoid being tagged out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Richvee said:

I would think NOT INT. INT with a thrown ball would need to be intentional here. Holliday thought Moreland tagged 1B before the throw to 2B.He was simply returning to 1B to avoid being tagged out.

interference by a retired runner has to be intentional? I don't think so. The only question is if this applies under the comment "If the batter or a runner continues to advance after he has been put out, he shall not by that act alone be considered as confusing, hindering or impeding the fielders." Apparently an umpire after the game was quoted as "He [Holliday] was just running the bases."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Gfoley4 said:

interference by a retired runner has to be intentional? I don't think so. The only question is if this applies under the comment "If the batter or a runner continues to advance after he has been put out, he shall not by that act alone be considered as confusing, hindering or impeding the fielders." Apparently an umpire after the game was quoted as "He [Holliday] was just running the bases."

Except that he wasn't advancing, he was retreating.  And aren't we supposed to apply the adage that a player is supposed to know the situation?  If he thought Moreland had already touched 1B, why not continue advancing to 2B?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BrianC14 said:

Except that he wasn't advancing, he was retreating.  

Yep, I agree with you. Maybe there is some other verbiage in other manuals? PBUC doesn't really add anything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@BrianC14,as a Red Sox fan, can your judgement be unbiased?:P I think it was good baseball...of course, I'm a Yankee fan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, LMSANS said:

@BrianC14,as a Red Sox fan, can your judgement be unbiased?:P I think it was good baseball...of course, I'm a Yankee fan.

I'm recalling Reggie Jackson throwing his hip into a throw from 2B to 1B.   Remember that one?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, BrianC14 said:

 If he thought Moreland had already touched 1B, why not continue advancing to 2B

Because he would have been tagged out by a mile.

 

31 minutes ago, Gfoley4 said:

Apparently an umpire after the game was quoted as "He [Holliday] was just running the bases."

Interesting....I'm still watching the game...live in the 16th.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Though you're welcome to read my detailed analysis ( Boston Files Protest Over Odd Interference No-Call ), allow me to posit just one question:

Would it have been interference had, all else equal, Holliday executed an otherwise bona fide slide into second base, and in doing so, prevented Bogaerts from completing his throw?

One of the key questions I answer in the analysis is whether a runner is legally allowed to retreat after/while being put out: is that a legitimate base-running act? We have a Case Play from Anaheim that deals with such a retreating runner.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, BrianC14 said:

Here's the video.

Don't even try to tell me R1 didn't do this intentionally.

 

https://www.mlb.com/gameday/yankees-vs-red-sox/2017/07/15/491456#game_state=final,game_tab=videos,game=491456

 

So you're saying he knew he was forced out (Knew F3 didn't touch 1B) and returned to 1B solely to interfere with F6's throw to 1B?..Then explain to me what he was thinking when he took of again for 2B after the ball went up the RF line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, BrianC14 said:

I'm recalling Reggie Jackson throwing his hip into a throw from 2B to 1B.   Remember that one?   

That play should have never happened. Should have been a dead ball, BR out for Russell's intentional drop of the line drive.

Right @Rich Ives ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Richvee said:

So you're saying he knew he was forced out (Knew F3 didn't touch 1B) and returned to 1B solely to interfere with F6's throw to 1B?..Then explain to me what he was thinking when he took of again for 2B after the ball went up the RF line.

He was thinking "mission accomplished".   F3 was six feet off the bag on a 1-hopper.   R1 was looking toward home as the play developed.   He knew exactly what was going on.   This isn't a 10U game, it's MLB.   

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BrianC14 said:

  If he thought Moreland had already touched 1B, why not continue advancing to 2B?

Because that's where the ball was.  Sheesh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rich Ives said:

Because that's where the ball was.  Sheesh.

Suddenly we factor in runners being unaware?  He knew what he was doing.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once the umpire says, "He was running the bases normally," the Red Sox lose their protest. He's applying the correct rule, and you can't protest judgment (in this case, of normalcy).

In any case, color me: correct call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, BrianC14 said:

Except that he wasn't advancing, he was retreating.  And aren't we supposed to apply the adage that a player is supposed to know the situation?  If he thought Moreland had already touched 1B, why not continue advancing to 2B?

Read the rule as "cointinues to run the bases"  and not literally as "advancing."  (I don't have the rule handy to be sure I get the tense correct)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, BrianC14 said:

I'm recalling Reggie Jackson throwing his hip into a throw from 2B to 1B.   Remember that one?   

Good no call!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that ultimately this is a judgment call to whether or not Holliday was running the bases normally, and in that light Boston will lose the protest.  The umpire likely believed that Holliday thought he was in a rundown.

Regardless of Holliday's post-game claims that he thought he was no longer forced, I don't buy it.  I think the judgment was a mistake.  I think Holliday knew exactly what he was doing and went back to first as the only possible means to break up a double play.

On 7/15/2017 at 7:37 PM, Gil said:

Though you're welcome to read my detailed analysis ( Boston Files Protest Over Odd Interference No-Call ), allow me to posit just one question:

Would it have been interference had, all else equal, Holliday executed an otherwise bona fide slide into second base, and in doing so, prevented Bogaerts from completing his throw?

One of the key questions I answer in the analysis is whether a runner is legally allowed to retreat after/while being put out: is that a legitimate base-running act? We have a Case Play from Anaheim that deals with such a retreating runner.

I would say the difference is in continuing to advance to second you are still working on a possibility that the fielder at second has not, or will not, successfully complete the force (missed the base, dropped the ball, etc).  You have a reasonable expectation that you could still be safe at second base, for a number of possible occurrences.  In retreating to first, provided that you reasonably knew you were still forced to second, there is no reasonable expectation that you will be safe in your retreat to first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

 I think Holliday knew exactly what he was doing and went back to first as the only possible means to break up a double play.

No one thinks that fast.  Fakes wouldn't work if you could think that fast. One is just in a read/react mode at that point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Rich Ives said:

No one thinks that fast.  Fakes wouldn't work if you could think that fast. One is just in a read/react mode at that point.

Yup, read the play, and react.  Whether you're making an immediate decision to drop a screaming line drive to try to get a cheap double play, or deciding between throwing home or to first from third base, or doing a hook slide, you are thinking that fast.   He might even have this as a preset possibility in his mind based on something that's happened before.

These guys are that good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0