Larry in TN

My son's LL Junior team scored two runs (R3 & R2) last season when the defense mistakenly thought that there was three-outs and headed for the dugout.

Another thing that this got me thinking about was how a bang-bang call is made at 1B. The umpire is looking at the base and listening for the ball. Does he listed for the ball to hit the glove or does he listen for the glove to close around the ball? He hears the ball hit the glove then looks to make sure that possession was maintained. He never sees the timing of when the glove closes around the ball.

Watching the replays during the game I was leaning toward "Safe", even as a Braves fan. Those still pictures changed my mind. That was quite a call by U2! Amazing Job Laird did putting the ball exactly where it needed to be to make the tag and Simmons didn't do too bad, either! Not yet convinced that Atlanta can out last the Dodger's offense, though. They've had a number of very hot streaks offensively and I think they're going to need that kind of performance in L.A. if they are to move on.

As was pointed out, it is obstruction, not interference. Look at the definition of obstruction in OBR 2.00: OBSTRUCTION is the act of a fielder who, while not in possession of the ball and not in the act of fielding the ball, impedes the progress of any runner. The key is that he "impedes the progress of" the runner. In your original post you didn't make it clear if the progress of the runner was impeded prior to the fielding having pocession of the ball (or being in the act of fielding if applicable under your rule set). In OBR obstruction occurs if he is not in possession of the ball and not int he act of fielding the ball. In other rule sets (LL, for example) it only excludes when the fielder is not in possession of the ball so a fielder may not impedes the progress of the runner while he's fielding the ball.

I'm confused by how you included basketball in a conversation about sports?

I don't think that LL has the "in the act of fielding" like OBR does. As Rich said, it was removed. The leading/stealing depends on division. Leading and stealing is allowed in Intermediate (50/70), Junior, Senior, and Big League divisions in the 2013 LL rule book.

Little League? I don't have my LL rule book handy. Does it include "and not in the act of fielding the ball" in its definition of Obstruction?

Just playing devil's advocate here... In a home run situation, is the BR's rounding of the bases part of the play? I would think so. If not, why does he have to do it? The BR has already earned all four bases so a defensive player's action which prevents him from completing the trip shouldn't put the home run in jeopardy. If it did, defensive players would be picking fights with the base-runners on every home run! And, once again, I'm a Braves (the defensive team) fan.

"No shirt, No shoes, No DICE!"

Look at the definition of Obstruction in 2.00. OBSTRUCTION is the act of a fielder who, while not in possession of the ball and not in the act of fielding the ball, impedes the progress of any runner. That's exactly what happened. Without McCann standing on the baseline there's no doubt that the BR would have continued to, and touched, home plate. The ball being dead at the time only makes it more obvious that the BR would have continued and scored as there was no possibility of the defense stopping him from doing so. Certainly not a situation that the rules anticipated but it should be clear to anyone watching that the run should be scored (and I'm a Braves fan). Would like to know more about how the particular players to be ejected where chosen. Can't see anything from the video that separates Freeman and Laird from what the rest of the Braves were doing. I would have thought Gomez and McCann from what I saw.

The Braves announcers (Chip Carey and Joe Simpson) agreed with the call even before they saw it again on replay. http://wapc.mlb.com/play/?content_id=30877173

No. It's ordinary effort for the level of play, not the particular player. OBR 2.00-- ORDINARY EFFORT is the effort that a fielder of average skill at a position in that league or classification of leagues should exhibit on a play, with due consideration given to the condition of the field and weather conditions.

Is this what you're looking for? http://www.amazon.com/Rules-Baseball-David-Nemec/dp/1558212809/ref=sr_1_21?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1378943067&sr=1-21

You think that they can control their movement across the ground in one of those things?

Joe Simpson (Braves) does a pretty good job. Also very good about admitting when a call that went against the Braves was right, or when they get the benefit of an incorrect call.

Here's the help page. http://support.tivo.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/196

As far as I know, DSD is a Windows program. You'd have to run an instance of Windows in a VM (Parallels?) on the Mac. Once the video file is converted it is just a standard video file and can be played on any platform.

So it is not interference against the batter because he is still in the box and has made no moves other than what would normally be made after a swing?

That's not practical and you don't want to be giving out your MAK. You can strip the DRM from the file with a free program called direct-show dump which can be downloaded at this link: http://www.dvd-ripping.biz/downloads/Dsd0.1.1424.0.msi DSD will strip the DRM from the *.tivo file and make it view-able by anyone without your MAK or any TiVo software.

We was trying to go around F3 who had just thrown the ball. F3 then went in the same direction and obstructed him.

How can it be an attempt to avoid a tag when the player he's going around doesn't have the ball?

But was that move an attempt to avoid a tag or just trying to go around the defensive player? The player he was trying to get around no longer had possession of the ball so I say it was the latter and not an out.

He's probably been practicing that for years!

"(b) He intentionally interferes with a thrown ball; or hinders a fielder attempting to make a play on a batted ball" The "intentionally interferes" in that sentence is only modifying "with a thrown ball". The "or hinders" part is not included so it doesn't have to be intentional.

That's exactly what I was talking about a week, or two, ago with trying to teach 13-15yr olds the difference between a foul and a foul tip.