Coach Carl

Totally dependent on the culture of the league. In my league, by the time I was coaching Majors, I had been coaching against all the other coaches for 3,4 maybe 5 years. We all knew each other and (mostly) got along well. As teams turnover and you add in post-season play, many of us even coached together at one time or another. So if that were my catcher, I wouldn't make an issue of it in the moment (even if it bothered me, which it would). Other leagues, I could see it provoking an argument. If you are not familiar with the league, then @Velho's advice looks great to me. Be ready to diffuse If the defensive coach appears to be upset. Then a short conversation with the "offender" to tell him that's not a great idea as it could turn in to something bigger. If that coach makes a habit of doing that in his games he's probably despised as a know-it-all and, at best, is most certainly an annoyance

And I forgot to mention, R2 was not out for interference. He was out for violating the contact rule OR for getting tagged (based on your judgement) and that is YOUR judgement, not an option given to the defense. As a side note, the only time the defense has options is when they are required to appeal to get a ruling on a violation, such as batting out of turn. And in that case, their option is between appealing and taking the decision or not appealing and allowing the play to stand. They can't appeal and then ask for options.

Babe Ruth/Cal Ripken is a "use OBR unless otherwise stated" rulebook. OBR doesn't cover a collision like this: it is at a base other than home and it doesn't involve a force play on another runner. As near as I can tell from perusing their website, Cal Ripken addresses this in their "Contact Rule": Babe Ruth Baseball and Cal Ripken Baseball (All Divisions) – Contact Rule – If a runner attempting to reach home plate or another base intentionally and maliciously runs into a defensive player in the area of home plate or a base, he will be called out and ejected from the game. So, in the OP, Central Cal Umpire would have had to judge that the runners actions were intentional and malicious and then call the runner out and eject him (absent a local rule to the contrary). Based on his description, I don't think the runners actions were either intentional or malicious but he'd have to answer that question himself. Since the runner was tagged, either way, he is out. Then, as Slippery Fish notes, if his further actions hinder the fielder in trying to get the Batter-Runner at second base we have the possibility of interference. If the retired runner, after knocking down the fielder, gets out of his way and doesn't further hinder him, then I don't see how you can call interference. However, if they are laying in a pile and the retired runner is on top of the fielder you may have something to consider. Also, since he is no longer a runner, intent is not required.

For reference, here is the text of the applicable rule: ASA is now USA Softball. Their rules would govern (a PDF of the rule book is available for free on their website). Rule 8, Section 5-b-2 SECTION 5 - RUNNERS ARE ENTITLED TO ADVANCE WITHOUT LIABILITY TO BE PUT OUT... B. When a fielder not in possession of the ball or not in the act of fielding a batted ball obstructs the progress of a runner or batter-runner. Effect: Delayed dead ball. 2. If the obstructed runner is put out prior to reaching the base which would have been reached had there been no obstruction. Effect: a The ball is dead. b The obstructed runner and all other runners shall always be awarded the base or bases which would have been reached, in the umpire’s judgment, had there been no obstruction. In the OP, the umpire lets it play out (delayed dead ball). If the umpire judged that, absent the obstruction, the batter-runner would have advanced to home, then he invokes #2 above. He calls time and rather than calling the runner out, he awards home.

The short answer is the pitcher is not an infielder. Note that 7.09(k) uses "fielder" and "infielder". The terms are not interchangeable. A fielder is any defensive player. An Infielder is the first, second and third baseman and the shortstop. The rules are not explicit, but: The rules define: infielder, outfielder, pitcher, catcher. It is not explicit that an infielder is only each of the basemen plus the shortstop but by defining the position of pitcher and catcher you can deduce that they are not infielders. You can also deduce it by reading the definition of Infield Fly. The rule explicitly states that "the pitcher, catcher, and any outfielder stationed in the infield on the play shall be considered infielders for the purposes of this rule." If pitchers were already considered infielders there wouldn't be any reason to add this statement to the infield fly rule.

There is nothing "fun" about correcting people on the rules.

I concur. If a time limit is adopted, it must be at least 1:45 (it can be more) -- "minimum of 1 hour and 45-minute time limit" Machine/Coach pitch and T-ball are permitted to be shorter. I think the "or" logic is that a game is a "regulation" game if: 1. Six innings (or extra-innings) are completed OR 2. It is shortened, but still "regulation", according to 4.10 and 4.11 (called due to weather, darkness, etc after 4 innings) OR 3. Shortened by time limit (if adopted) OR 4. Conceded due to run rule (if adopted).

Rule 10-22 Earned Run a. An earned run shall be charged against a pitcher when a runner scores because of a safe hit, sacrifice hit, sacrifice fly, stolen base, putout, fielder’s choice, base on balls, hit batter, balk or wild pitch (even when the wild pitch is a third strike), provided that in each case it is before the defensive team has had an opportunity to make a third putout. Note: In determining earned runs, the scorer shall reconstruct the inning as if there were no errors or passed balls. Give the pitcher the benefit of the doubt in determining the advancement of runners, had the defensive team been errorless.

Doesn't the interference occur the moment R1 collides with F3?

Could work but I think the official limit is 15 players.

The rules don't allow for it. The section headed "Eligibility" is pretty clear: "Under NO circumstances does ANY person have the authority to grant a waiver that allows a child to play in a local Little League program IN ANY DIVISION, when that child does not qualify under (the residency or school location requirements). Thoughts, Juniors is a 12-14 year old division (possible 15). 1. Do you have a Senior division (13-16) that some players could play in? 2. Do you have an Intermediate division (11-13) that some players could play in? 3. Is it feasible to get another coach and go with 12 player teams? If that roster size feels too small, could you supplement the teams with call ups from Intermediate or Majors, as needed?

I agree with this sentiment and wish it could prevail. The problem you will run into is there will inevitably be some kids who become interested in post season play and now you have old promises not to play all-stars that were made in good faith but the parents or player no longer want to be held to them. Options: (1) as SeeingEyeDog mentioned, get a meeting with the other leagues and rather than seeking out waiver processes, see if boundaries can be re-drawn. If other leagues aren't getting players from that area then they may not care. (2) give up on the 8+ year olds and devote volunteer resources to developing a robust T-ball program for the 4-7 year olds. In a couple of years you'll have lots of those out of boundry kids legally participating in your league and you've accomplished your goal while leaving all-stars open for anyone. (3) Find out if your local parks and rec department truly wants you to stay in Little League. You may find that they use "Little League" generically. It may be that they would be just as satisfied with Cal Ripken or Pony. They may just want to have a national organization backing the program. Both of those orgs have boundary issues as well but in your local area they may already be drawn to allow your outreach of the nearby areas. Or they may be more amenable to changes, if the Little League folks are not. (Or you may be able to use the threat of leaving as motivation to change the LL boundaries).

Generally, a player is eligible for your league if he lives in your boundries or goes to school in your boundries. However, Little League has loosened it's boundry requirements. Carefully review Regulation II regarding League Age 4-7 players. Any player who is league age 7 or younger can "register in any Little League program without respect to any geography-related eligibility or school enrollment eligibility requirements." Since this is a written rule, if you are following it, there is no waiver required. For kids league age 8+ there may be eligibility based on a league age 4-7 sibling. It's hard to make blanket statements about that. Check it over on a case by case basis. Further, a player who lives in any territory outside your league boundry that is also NOT within the geographic boundry of another Little League is eligible to play in any league, regardless of age (again, with caveats that should be investigated on a case by case basis).

In your sitch (R1 stealing) he is a runner and the intent standard applies. In TopHat's sitch the player has scored and is no longer a runner. I think that changes his status in regards to being liable for interference (intent not required). I think he is now under the same interference standards as the base coaches and the on-deck batter. He has an obligation to get out (or stay out) of the way. In TopHat's sitch, I think you would call interference if, in your judgement as umpire, both of these conditions apply: (1) the member of the offense is able to get out of the way and (2) actual obstructing, hindring, etc. has been committed.

Maybe these will help. From the 2022 Rules. Rule 2 Definitions: SECTION 51. An act that hinders or prevents a player from making a play. a) Offensive interference is an act by the team at bat which interferes with, obstructs, impedes, hinders, or confuses any fielder attempting to make a play. Rule 8-5 When Runners Are Out q. Any member of the offensive team does not vacate any live-ball area, thus interfering with a defensive player attempting to field a batted or thrown ball. This includes the batter, once the pitch has crossed the plate. I believe "thrown" ball is synonomous with "not batted". In other words, for the purposes of the rules, if it is not batted, it is thrown. There are no rules that I am aware of that use another descriptor besides thrown or batted. The Interference definition helps to see that the standard is interfering with a fielder "attempting to make a play." That means, I think, attempting to get a baserunner out. It also implies that contact with the ball or the fielder is not required. Obstructing, impeding, hindering or confusing can all happen without contact (based on umpire judgement, of course). 8-5-q helps to see that the interference (in your play) does not have to be intentional. The member of the offense has the obligation to get out of the way. This implies that intent is not required. I'm just a coach who likes to study the rules so some better experts should be along to confirm or refute.

Rule 2 SECTION 20 INNINGS ART. 2 . . . A half-inning is the interval during which one team is on offense (batting) and the other is on defense (fielding). A half-inning ends when there is a third out or when, in the last inning, the winning run is scored. In either case, if there is a delayed out declared by the umpire for a baserunning infraction, a possible fourth out may be recognized (9-1- 1d, e).

I have the 2018 version of the rules and it uses "an". (8-2-6-j) I also thought C was applicable as well (for the same reasons you note) and FWIW the 2018 rules uses "pitcher and all infielders". (8-2 penalty note on Arts. 1-5)

The LL ruleset does not address braces or other dental hardware so there is no rule that requires a player to have protection. See Appendix B for the "Safety Code". I've been a Safety Officer for my local league and it has never been brought up in our league. It would certainly be permitted for a player to choose to protect himself with a mouthguard (football syle) or a NOCSAE approved helmet cheek guard. If there are other ways, unless it poses a danger to others, I can't see any reason to restrict.

Where was the foot of F3? If F3 had stepped off the bag then the the runner would have visual evidence in front of him that the third baseman gave up on the play. Regardless, if your ruleset requires a play that is irrelevant. A play (or attempted play) requires a legitimate effort to retire a runner: tag attempt, running toward a base or runner to make a tag, throwing the ball to another player in an attempt to retire a runner. None of those conditions existed in your sitch.

Oops, I missed your "BR" reference. It doesn't surprise me that there wasn't any apparent impact since F3 is also about 3" closer to the fielder. In fact, I'd argue it would help the defense as an infielder can throw a ball about 4-5 times faster than a runner can run.

Actually, only 4.5" (between 1st and 2nd and between 2nd ans 3rd). https://www.mlb.com/glossary/rules/base-sizes

In the beginning, all the bases were centered on the points of the diamond. First and third were moved to make it easier to determine fair/foul. https://sabr.org/journal/article/the-evolution-of-the-baseball-diamond-perfection-came-slowly/

I think the scorekeeper who is the official book must be prepared to be completely impartial. Everyone knows you are with the home team but you should act as if you are not. If the coach wants to consult a scorebook to check on something that would gain a competitive advantage (i.e. on a BOO situation) he should keep one in the dugout for those purposes. As the official book, I'd position myself away form both dugouts and shoo any players or coaches away who are fishing for information other than the score and inning (and only because that is not available on a scoreboard at your games). As a scorekeeper, I would not ask the umpire ANY questions to help you with your duties, unless it involves whether or not a run scored or an out was made. For the purposes of keeping stats, keep up with the game as best you can and live with the result. As an example, clarifying a swinging strike three vs. a called strike three would not be a question you should ask (It should be obvious anyway: did he swing or not? if it was a half-swing, did the defense appeal? -- those two pieces of info should be enough). Don't bother the umpire on details whose only purpose is to help compile stats.

Another note for youth rec leagues: Cal Ripken/Babe Ruth and Pony follow OBR unless an exception is written. LL has based their rules on OBR and maintains them without referencing a clause such as "follow OBR unless noted". All this to say, I think in Pony and CR/BR you'd follow the dirt circle standard. I searched their rules and couldn't find any note of keeping the old "dugout or dead ball territory" standard that LL still follows.

This approved ruling also appears in the Little League rulebook.