Jump to content

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member
  • 0
Sign in to follow this  
Guest Rick

Plate Umpire Interference

Question

Guest Rick

R1, R3, 2 Out. R1 is stealing on the pitch. The plate umpire interferes with the catcher's throw to the 2nd baseman, and was not able to retire the runner. However, after receiving the ball, the 2nd baseman notices R3 breaking for home, and throws the ball to the catcher, who tags R3, and is called out at the plate. What's the correct call?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 answers to this question

Recommended Posts


Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member
  • 0

To expand, if the catcher's direct throw retires the runner, the runner is out and the ball remains live.  If the catcher's direct throw does not retire the runner, the ball is dead and all runners return to TOP bases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest Rick

I appreciate the responses, and that's what I would call; however, I may need to be prepared for a "conversation" with the defensive manager.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest NJ Coach

This may be a silly question, but if less than two outs and the catcher throws out R1 (but R3 scores), does the defensive team still have the option to choose if to 'accept' the interference call or not ?   Meaning, even though R1 was thrown out stealing, could they allow for him to get sent back to first due to the ump interference with R3 getting sent back to third too ?

Or does getting the out nullify the interference call ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
11 minutes ago, Guest NJ Coach said:

This may be a silly question, but if less than two outs and the catcher throws out R1 (but R3 scores), does the defensive team still have the option to choose if to 'accept' the interference call or not ?   Meaning, even though R1 was thrown out stealing, could they allow for him to get sent back to first due to the ump interference with R3 getting sent back to third too ?

Or does getting the out nullify the interference call ?

There is no option

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
14 minutes ago, Rich Ives said:

There is no option

Correct.  The specific language in the rulebook is "Note: The interference shall be disregarded if the catcher’s throw retires the runner."

If the catcher's direct throw retires the runner, there is no interference, the ball remains live, and whatever happens happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
50 minutes ago, Guest NJ Coach said:

This may be a silly question, but if less than two outs and the catcher throws out R1 (but R3 scores), does the defensive team still have the option to choose if to 'accept' the interference call or not ?   Meaning, even though R1 was thrown out stealing, could they allow for him to get sent back to first due to the ump interference with R3 getting sent back to third too ?

No. Same as a better interfering with a catcher making a throw.  Get an out--no harm no foul.  No out, kill it and fix it.

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  

×