Jump to content

Register or Sign In to remove these ads
  • 0
Sign in to follow this  
timelydew

Question About Interference (Runner Interfering with Fielder/Batted Ball)

Question

My question is simple - if a base runner deliberately interferes with a fielder attempting to field a batted ball, is or can the batter-runner be out as well? For example, if there's a runner on first, and the batter pops one up high to the first baseman, is just the runner out (assume he's off his base a bit when this transpires) if he deliberately interferes with the first baseman attempting to field it, or are both he and the B.R. out? Or, must it be a blatantly obvious double play situation for both to be out (e.g., a grounder to an infielder instead of a pop-out)? Sounds to me by this snippet ("If the batter-runner is adjudged not to have hindered a fielder attempting to make a play on a batted ball, and if the base runner’s interference is adjudged not to be intentional, the batter-runner shall be awarded first base") that a pop out could award both outs, but I'm unsure.

Rules in question:
"He fails to avoid a fielder who is attempting to field a batted ball, or intentionally interferes with a thrown ball, provided that if two or more fielders attempt to field a batted ball, and the runner comes in contact with one or more of them, the umpire shall determine which fielder is entitled to the benefit of this rule, and shall not declare the runner out for coming in contact with a fielder other than the one the umpire determines to be entitled to field such a ball. The umpire shall call the runner out in accordance with Rule 5.09(b)(3) (former Rule 7.08(b)). If the batter-runner is adjudged not to have hindered a fielder attempting to make a play on a batted ball, and if the base runner’s interference is adjudged not to be intentional, the batter-runner shall be awarded first base;"

"If, in the judgment of the umpire, a base runner willfully and deliberately interferes with a batted ball or a fielder in the act of fielding a batted ball with the obvious intent to break up a double play, the ball is dead. The umpire shall call the runner out for interference and also call out the batter-runner because of the action of his teammate. In no event may bases be run or runs scored because of such action by a runner (see Rule 6.01(j));"

And this one (I think, although it explicitly mentions an occupied base, which isn't the case in my scenario):
If, however, the runner has contact with a legally occupied base when he hinders the fielder, he shall not be called out unless, in the umpire’s judgment, such hindrance, whether it occurs on fair or foul territory, is intentional. If the umpire declares the hindrance intentional, the following penalty shall apply: With less than two out, the umpire shall declare both the runner and batter out. With two out, the umpire shall declare the batter out."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
26 minutes ago, timelydew said:

My question is simple - if a base runner deliberately interferes with a fielder attempting to field a batted ball, is or can the batter-runner be out as well? For example, if there's a runner on first, and the batter pops one up high to the first baseman, is just the runner out if he deliberately interferes with the first baseman attempting to field it, or are both he and the B.R. out? Or, must it be a blatantly obvious double play situation for both to be out (e.g., a grounder to an infielder instead of a pop-out)? Sounds to me by this snippet ("If the batter-runner is adjudged not to have hindered a fielder attempting to make a play on a batted ball, and if the base runner’s interference is adjudged not to be intentional, the batter-runner shall be awarded first base") that a pop out could award both outs, but I'm unsure.

Rules in question:
"He fails to avoid a fielder who is attempting to field a batted ball, or intentionally interferes with a thrown ball, provided that if two or more fielders attempt to field a batted ball, and the runner comes in contact with one or more of them, the umpire shall determine which fielder is entitled to the benefit of this rule, and shall not declare the runner out for coming in contact with a fielder other than the one the umpire determines to be entitled to field such a ball. The umpire shall call the runner out in accordance with Rule 5.09(b)(3) (former Rule 7.08(b)). If the batter-runner is adjudged not to have hindered a fielder attempting to make a play on a batted ball, and if the base runner’s interference is adjudged not to be intentional, the batter-runner shall be awarded first base;"

"If, in the judgment of the umpire, a base runner willfully and deliberately interferes with a batted ball or a fielder in the act of fielding a batted ball with the obvious intent to break up a double play, the ball is dead. The umpire shall call the runner out for interference and also call out the batter-runner because of the action of his teammate. In no event may bases be run or runs scored because of such action by a runner (see Rule 6.01(j));"

And this one (I think, although it explicitly mentions an occupied base, which isn't the case in my scenario):
If, however, the runner has contact with a legally occupied base when he hinders the fielder, he shall not be called out unless, in the umpire’s judgment, such hindrance, whether it occurs on fair or foul territory, is intentional. If the umpire declares the hindrance intentional, the following penalty shall apply: With less than two out, the umpire shall declare both the runner and batter out. With two out, the umpire shall declare the batter out."

Absent the INT, would there have been a double play?  In your pop-up scenario -- no.  BR would be out and R1 would return to first.  Since there was INT, change that to R1 is out and BR is awarded first.

 

Note that if this was an Infield Fly situation, that the BR is out on the infield fly, AND R1 is out for the INT.

 

(FED has a different standard for getting two outs here -- but it still wouldn't apply on the pop-up situation.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Register or Sign In to remove these ads
  • 0
1 minute ago, noumpere said:

Absent the INT, would there have been a double play?  In your pop-up scenario -- no.  BR would be out and R1 would return to first.  Since there was INT, change that to R1 is out and BR is awarded first.

 

Note that if this was an Infield Fly situation, that the BR is out on the infield fly, AND R1 is out for the INT.

 

(FED has a different standard for getting two outs here -- but it still wouldn't apply on the pop-up situation.)

 

As usual, you give me a clear, concise answer. Thanks, friend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
13 minutes ago, noumpere said:

Absent the INT, would there have been a double play?  In your pop-up scenario -- no.  BR would be out and R1 would return to first.  Since there was INT, change that to R1 is out and BR is awarded first.

 

Note that if this was an Infield Fly situation, that the BR is out on the infield fly, AND R1 is out for the INT.

 

(FED has a different standard for getting two outs here -- but it still wouldn't apply on the pop-up situation.)

I do have one more question - if R1 were standing on a base when the interference/hindrance happens during an infield fly, he's not out, just the batter, right? (assume unintentional INT this time)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
7 minutes ago, timelydew said:

I do have one more question - if R1 were standing on a base when the interference/hindrance happens during an infield fly, he's not out, just the batter, right? (assume unintentional INT this time)

Correct

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 minute ago, noumpere said:

Correct

Sweet, and if it were intentional, he'd be out as per... "If, however, the runner has contact with a legally occupied base when he hinders the fielder, he shall not be called out unless, in the umpire’s judgment, such hindrance, whether it occurs on fair or foul territory, is intentional. If the umpire declares the hindrance intentional, the following penalty shall apply: With less than two out, the umpire shall declare both the runner and batter out. With two out, the umpire shall declare the batter out."

I didn't mean to break this question up into disparate parts, haha. Haven't coffeed up just yet. Just making sure. I'm done now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×