- 0
Infield Fly, Interterence, or Both?
Umpire-Empire locks topics which have not been active in the last year. The thread you are viewing hasn't been active in 2273 days so you will not be able to post. We do recommend you starting a new topic to find out what's new in the world of umpiring.
Question
CJK
R1, R2, 0 out.
The ball is popped up in infield, playable by the pitcher with ordinary effort (in the judgment of the umpire) and called out as an Infield Fly, and runners retreat to their bases.
The pitcher allows the ball to fall untouched in fair territory, its spin causes it to bounce toward the 1B line, and it touches the BR who is running inside the line (in fair territory).
In the clinic where I heard this example, the guidance given was to get 2 outs on the play (BR on the infield fly, R2 on interference).
In which rule set(s) would the guidance be correct? In which rule set(s) would the guidance be incorrect?
((Just for the record, this particular clinic was USA Softball.))
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
11
8
3
3
Popular Days
Jan 25
22
Jan 24
9
Jan 26
8
Top Posters For This Question
beerguy55 11 posts
Jimurray 8 posts
Rich Ives 3 posts
maven 3 posts
Popular Days
Jan 25 2018
22 posts
Jan 24 2018
9 posts
Jan 26 2018
8 posts
Popular Posts
grayhawk
I've read all the responses and have decided that if this happens in a game I am working, I am not getting two outs. As Maven said, if not for the BR getting hit by the ball, it's foul and nobody is
Stk004
Here's the thing, you can't get two outs on the same runner. You made the crucial observation that we don't have an IFF yet because fair/foul has not been determined. Here's what I'm thinking. B
Jimurray
A retired runner cannot dissappear from the basepath immediately and in fact becomes subject to INT without intent once he peels off. With an IFF the BR might be breaking his run down on the 1B line w
38 answers to this question
Recommended Posts