Jump to content

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member
  • 0
Sign in to follow this  
Double Up

45 ft. running lane violations

Question

When is this ever enforced?   I swear the only time I ever see this called for interference is when the BR is hit by the ball during the play at 1B.   

So many balls are thrown over and around the BR who is obviously obstructing the defenses ability to make a good throw by running in fair territory.   

what actually has to happen to have interference called on these plays??  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 answers to this question

Recommended Posts


Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member
  • 0

Depending on the rule set, the rule isn't there to help the defense make a good throw but to allow the defender to field a quality throw. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
6 hours ago, Double Up said:

So many balls are thrown over and around the BR who is obviously obstructing the defenses ability to make a good throw by running in fair territory.   

what actually has to happen to have interference called on these plays??  

1) Because that's not the OBR rule.  It is (part of) the FED rule, and it's called when appropriate, at least around here.

2) Well, INT, for one -- not just "trying to INT" or "potential INT."

Share this post


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

1) Because that's not the OBR rule.  It is (part of) the FED rule, and it's called when appropriate, at least around here.

2) Well, INT, for one -- not just "trying to INT" or "potential INT."

And that, I suspect, is the safety slant to the FED rule set.  The OBR rule effectively encourages catchers to hit the b/r in the back of the head.  But, as has been said many times, the rules were written by gentlemen for gentlemen.  The assumption is the catcher won't attempt to injure.  A professional adult ball player is going to try to make the play (usually).  An adolescent and emotionally underdeveloped ball player (Manny Machado) could be prone to trying to get the out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

RLI has 3 necessary conditions to be called:

  1. BR with at least 1 foot completely out of the lane
  2. A throw to 1B
  3. Hindrance of the fielder taking the throw at 1B

Different codes can add slight wrinkles (OBR requires a "quality" throw and FED has an unintelligible provision about "the ball being fielded or thrown to 1B"—WTF does "fielded to 1B" mean?), but all have these 3 conditions.

What's unusual about the rule is that (1) ordinary INT generally involves fielders making a play on the ball, not receiving a throw, and (2) runners are generally entitled to run wherever they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
9 hours ago, Double Up said:

When is this ever enforced?   I swear the only time I ever see this called for interference is when the BR is hit by the ball during the play at 1B.   

So many balls are thrown over and around the BR who is obviously obstructing the defenses ability to make a good throw by running in fair territory.   

what actually has to happen to have interference called on these plays??  

The overly simple answer is that there had to be interference. Woulda coulda doesn't count.  Ball thrown and caught - no interference was there? 

Any shaving age players should know how to set up and get the throw to 1B.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Basically, What I'm hearing is that obstructing the throw isn't interference, but rather hindering the catch is interference.

In a nutshell the catch, nevertheless has to make a "quality throw". Point taken! 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
8 minutes ago, Double Up said:

Basically, What I'm hearing is that obstructing the throw isn't interference, but rather hindering the catch is interference.

In a nutshell the catch, nevertheless has to make a "quality throw". Point taken! 

 

 

Except that FED has a slightly different take on this -- sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
16 minutes ago, Double Up said:

nevertheless has to make a "quality throw"

When in doubt, right between the shoulder blades is a perfect throw.   That'll get the batter out every time.  ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 hour ago, beerguy55 said:

When in doubt, right between the shoulder blades is a perfect throw.   That'll get the batter out every time.  ;)

 

Don't teach that. Don't. Not only is it bush, it invites retaliation.

Getting a throwing lane is easy.

 

Share this post


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

Don't teach that. Don't. Not only is it bush, it invites retaliation.

Getting a throwing lane is easy.

 

Jesus Christ.  Stop being an irony free zone.  If you thought I was serious give your head a shake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 hour ago, beerguy55 said:

Jesus Christ.  Stop being an irony free zone.  If you thought I was serious give your head a shake.

The regulars may get it but the lurkers may not.  I've encountered too many coaches who think it's a good move.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
On 10/18/2018 at 2:12 PM, Rich Ives said:

The regulars may get it but the lurkers may not.  I've encountered too many coaches who think it's a good move.

You and me both.   So, yes, I'll be very clear, I do not in any way advocate intentionally throwing the ball at the batter to get a RLI call...side step one step and you give yourself an open path to your target.

Now is the problem of why so many coaches think it's a good move - questions of integrity, morality and general asshattiness aside - here's my anecdotal experience:

In 100% of the occasions where F2's throw hit the B/R the umpire called him out (when outside the lane...and, in fact, in some cases, when inside the running lane)

In 95% of the occasions where F2's throw missed the B/R and F3 failed to make the catch the umpire ruled it nothing.   I don't think I've seen five RLI calls in my life where the ball didn't hit the batter.

So, they've been trained that accidentally-on-purpose hitting the batter/runner will get them an out...more easily than trying to step to the side or make a clean throw over the runner's shoulder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

And, no matter how concisely/precisely/black and white/whatever, the rule is written, there will always be something that happens on the field that does does not go precisely and perfectly with the words and examples that are given. Some situations and judgment fall under the old terminology of 'grey area', and you just have to use your best judgment and 'just umpire' .

Just as batters miss pitches right down broad-way unintentionally when hitting, or pitchers miss the strike zone when pitching unintentionally, the umpires will (not maybe) miss calls unintentionally. Sometimes, just as players, you just have to let judgment and instincts, even bad ones at that, take over and make the judgment (in my judgment) call, and not look back.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
On 10/18/2018 at 10:47 AM, Rich Ives said:

The overly simple answer is that there had to be interference. Woulda coulda doesn't count.  Ball thrown and caught - no interference was there? 

Any shaving age players should know how to set up and get the throw to 1B.

Which they did last night in Dodger-Brewer game 7. Buehler bunted and ran inside the whole way. Easy Peasy. 

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 emoji 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  

×