jimurrayalterego

For completeness CCS left out a pertinent exception regarding a runner in contact with his base. The OP does not have that condition but it had the potential to have been a factor. The runner contacted the fielder's glove about a foot from 3B so we don't have a runner in contact with his base. "Rule 6.01(a) Penalty for Interference Comment: A runner who is adjudged to have hindered a fielder who is attempting to make a play on a batted ball is out whether it was intentional or not. If, however, the runner has contact with a legally occupied base when he hinders the fielder, he shall not be called out unless, in the umpire’s judgment, such hindrance, whether it occurs on fair or foul territory, is intentional. If the umpire declares the hindrance intentional, the following penalty shall apply: With less than two out, the umpire shall declare both the runner and batter out. With two out, the umpire shall declare the batter out."

He can't be called for interference with a fielder unless intentional. But why can't he be called for being hit by a fly batted ball, other than an Infield Fly, that satisfies the rule.

Your logic makes sense. I'm asking if there is a cite allowing a runner to interfere with a fielder fielding a batted ball that isn't a fly ball and most likely will be foul. And for your "squibber" what do we have if the ball rolls foul after the INT?

Let's say your mis view was correct. Do we care if the ball might have gone fair? The B-R interfered with a fielder trying to field a batted ball and touched it to make it foul. I can't find an exception to not call the B-R out.

Legal. You can feint to 2B from the rubber on any type of move. The feint requires a step toward 2B. No throw or arm motion is required. Once the step happened and the pivot foot came of the rubber the pitcher is considered disengaged and can run at the runner or throw anywhere.

Since @Biscuit was reading the rule I didn't address NCAA because it's in their rule.

FED used to allow a foul tip to be caught by a fielder but that's changed to the catcher only. OBR has an interp that only allowsthe catcher to catch it.

We don't have to be. But did they understand what they wanted and will get with the change? Did they want to showcase the athleticism of F2s with a cannon?

Shorter throw by approx 12" for F2. Article says 2B-1B delta is approx 9". shorter run for R1. Did they do the math and decided to show the athleticism of F2. "provide additional opportunities for players to showcase their athleticism. I'm not going to do the math at this hour but I suspect 12" for a throw gets it there faster than 9" for a runner.

They don't have a clue how a pitcher gets comfortable while engaging the rubber and is not engaged until the pivot foot is parallel and touching the rubber.

Umpire has not ever been in proximity to a rule book or clinic. He seems adept at pulling sht out of his hat. (halfway clean anyway)

Show your math, I get approx 12" closer to HP. It's martini time so not going to do the delta for 2B - 1B distance. 😀

Yes, a common question here but we don't expect newcomers to use the search function. Right out of the OBR, MLB's rulebook: "5.08 Comment .......................................APPROVED RULING: One out, Jones on third, Smith on first, and Brown flies out to right field. Two outs. Jones tags up and scores after the catch. Smith attempted to return to first but the right fielder’s throw beat him to the base. Three outs. But Jones scored before the throw to catch Smith reached first base, hence Jones’ run counts. It was not a force play." It's what we call a "time play".

NCAA wouldn't like it but MLB doesn't seem to care where the stutter step goes. It gives no advantage.

I don't think they didn't want to call it. They obviously agreed there was a stutter step when they got together. They just weren't focused on the sit and a pitcher's delivery which has you pay close attention to.