Jump to content

Runner Lane Interference


johnnyg08
Umpire-Empire locks topics which have not been active in the last year. The thread you are viewing hasn't been active in 1831 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.

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

So the rule reads that "interference SHALL be called if the throw hits the runner"  By rule, under NCAA, are we required to call RLI on this play? 

 

 

Screen Shot 2019-03-19 at 8.47.36 AM.jpg

I'm not sure the ball hit the runner but it would be RLI if he hindered the fielder's opportunity to field the ball which I think is what NCAA says happened in this case and RLI should have been called. It's on the NCAA arbiter site in Video Bulletin #3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, yawetag said:

Wouldn't R1 be sent back to 1B (NCAA 6-2-g)?

Yes, but not due to 6-2g (which states runners return TOI.  R1 had touched second base at TOI).  It's 2-51 Note 2 that governs:

Note 2: If the batter-runner has not touched first base at the time of interference, all runners shall return to the base last occupied at the time of the pitch. If there was an intervening play made on another runner, all runners shall return to the base last touched at the time of interference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Senor Azul said:

Here’s the play-by-play (Minnesota v Dallas Baptist, 2/23/19)—“Isaacson (uniform number 4) grounded out to c (2-1 BKB); Bandy advanced to second.” So, interference must have been called on this play.

Or maybe F3 gloved the throw and they got the out? Maybe NCAA was just using this for training?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jimurray said:

Or maybe F3 gloved the throw and they got the out? Maybe NCAA was just using this for training?

From the research I've done, the throw hit the runner who was running illegally out of the running lane and was caught by whomever was covering first base for the out. 

But the rule reads: "OR the batter/runner is hit by the throw....it SHALL be called interference" 

There certainly could be different information out there about what happened. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, johnnyg08 said:

From the research I've done, the throw hit the runner who was running illegally out of the running lane and was caught by whomever was covering first base for the out. 

But the rule reads: "OR the batter/runner is hit by the throw....it SHALL be called interference" 

There certainly could be different information out there about what happened. 

I see what you are getting at. You would not expect a throw hitting the B-R still being caught for an out. But it might have in the OP and NCAA is saying it's should have been RLI.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Mr. johnnyg08, for your research on this play in question. I can find just one reference so far to the real question you are asking. Unfortunately, it is an OBR case play but I think it might be helpful.

From the 2017 Jaksa/Roder manual (chapter 13, p. 113) example play 5:

R2, no outs. The batter-runner bunts and is running to first on fair territory. The catcher fields the bunt and throws to first. The ball just barely touches the batter-runner’s shoulder. The first baseman flinches, but catches the ball for an apparent out at first. He then throws home against R2, who is safe: despite the success of the play to first it is still interference. Batter-runner out, R2 back to second base.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Senor Azul said:

Thanks, Mr. johnnyg08, for your research on this play in question. I can find just one reference so far to the real question you are asking. Unfortunately, it is an OBR case play but I think it might be helpful.

From the 2017 Jaksa/Roder manual (chapter 13, p. 113) example play 5:

R2, no outs. The batter-runner bunts and is running to first on fair territory. The catcher fields the bunt and throws to first. The ball just barely touches the batter-runner’s shoulder. The first baseman flinches, but catches the ball for an apparent out at first. He then throws home against R2, who is safe: despite the success of the play to first it is still interference. Batter-runner out, R2 back to second base.

Nice find. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's interesting what we debate and what we'd never consider debating...

In this case, the rule book specifically reads that if the batter/runner is hit by the thrown ball and he's non compliant, that interference SHALL be called...yet for some reason there is debate. 
 
Could you imagine responding to a coach when he asks why you didn't call out R1 for being hit by the batted ball and they proceed to turn a 4-6-3 double play that "it didn't alter the defense's ability to play on the ball?" 
 
Just interesting what we debate and why.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/24/2019 at 9:27 AM, johnnyg08 said:

A friend sent me this:

A memo from Bruns:
 

 

Screen Shot 2019-03-24 at 11.25.37 AM.jpg

Number 1 above is why I have been saying that a "quality throw" is not required in NCAA.  It's exactly the same as Fed in this regard.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...