Jump to content

Batter/Runner Interference


Recommended Posts

FED rules. I believe outs and runners are irrelevant.

BR either a) hits a slow roller fielded by the pitcher :smachhead: swings and misses strike 3 in the dirt, which is blocked up by the catcher or c) hits a slow roller to the 3rd baseman which field the ball and throw to 1st base to record the out. However, once the runner has reached the 45' mark, he is not in the runner's lane. Does the throw have to make contact with the BR for this to be interference? I don't think it really matters with a, b, or c. I was just providing difference scenarios. And when interference is called, is it an immediate dead ball, or is it a delayed dead ball? I'm pretty sure it's immediate, I just don't want to be that fool that comes out hollering "DEAD BALL" when in fact, I should have waited.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 22
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Ball coming from the plate area, runner not in the running lane and interferes. This means he gets in the way of the throw but it doesn't hit him. Kill the ball, call him out and return any runners.

So you are saying if the fact he is out of the lane forces a high or wild throw, then you have a violation, correct ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

In Fed yes, in OBR the throw still has to be a quality throw but you can still interfere. In Fed you are ruling on the runner interfering with the throw so making the throw go wild will be a violation. In OBR you are ruling the runner interfering with the F3's ability to make the catch. This requires a quality throw but the runner has to prevent the F3 from making the play.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not doubting your rules knowlede at all. I know you are right but was wondering if you or someone else could give a little more clarification under the OBR rule set. The way I am seeing it right now is this : The runner must interfere with F3 who is going to be at 1B waiting on the throw. In order for the runner to interfere he will also need to be at or very near 1B at which point he will have to be back in the lane in order to touch the base. Aside from the runner just barreling F3 over I'm having trouble seeing how he could interfere unless the ball hits him while he is out of the lane. ( earlier while he is still away from the base )

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not doubting your rules knowlede at all. I know you are right but was wondering if you or someone else could give a little more clarification under the OBR rule set. The way I am seeing it right now is this : The runner must interfere with F3 who is going to be at 1B waiting on the throw. In order for the runner to interfere he will also need to be at or very near 1B at which point he will have to be back in the lane in order to touch the base. Aside from the runner just barreling F3 over I'm having trouble seeing how he could interfere unless the ball hits him while he is out of the lane. ( earlier while he is still away from the base )

Under OBR, you will most likely get this call when the ball hits the BR with an accurate throw. J/R says that interference can also be called if the BR "obscures the vision of the fielder who gloves, but drops the ball."

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not doubting your rules knowlede at all. I know you are right but was wondering if you or someone else could give a little more clarification under the OBR rule set. The way I am seeing it right now is this : The runner must interfere with F3 who is going to be at 1B waiting on the throw. In order for the runner to interfere he will also need to be at or very near 1B at which point he will have to be back in the lane in order to touch the base. Aside from the runner just barreling F3 over I'm having trouble seeing how he could interfere unless the ball hits him while he is out of the lane. ( earlier while he is still away from the base )

carolina,

Most of the time this situation happens, it's going to involve a throw from the area around the plate, or just in front of it. As you point out it's pretty tough for a runner to be out of the lane and actually touch 1B, and if he is then it's going to be a much more obvious Int. call.

That's not to say it can't happen with a throw from someplace else, it's just unlikely. Biggest judgment question you have is whether it was a quality throw that F3 had a chance at, and I'm giving F3 plenty of room to have a "reasonable" chance at a catch.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good enough for me. I believe the BR being outside the lane interfered w/ the fielders ability to catch the ball.

Ditto.

The B/R is required to use the lane, not doing so is enough intent to bag the Int., but it's Int. with F3 fielding the ball, hence the need for a "quality" throw. If he's out of the lane though I've got a pretty liberal view of what quality goes into it. A ball 2 feet above F3's head obviously doesn't meet a quality standard, but just because it may wind up in the outfield doesn't mean there wasn't Int. on the play.

Link to post
Share on other sites
so say the throw comes from the catcher, goes over the runners shoulder and the first basemen drops the ball. If you rule that he would have caught it if hte runner wasnt there, its interference?
If the thrown ball does not hit the BR but hits F3 in the glove and he drops it that is not interference. It's an error.
Link to post
Share on other sites

so say the throw comes from the catcher, goes over the runners shoulder and the first basemen drops the ball. If you rule that he would have caught it if hte runner wasnt there, its interference?

Don,

For me the telling part of it is highlighted above. I would agree it's hard to see a sitch. where the throw hits F3 in the glove and there is Int., but it can defenitley happen. The B/R has a lane he belongs in for a reason, if he's in it there isn't any Int. and F2 and F3 know what they've gotta do, if he's out of it he's put himself in jeopardy.

In all though I'm in agreement with Brian, as it's one of those things that will be much easier to "see" than to read.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The OP was a Fed question and the quality of the throw is not part of the equation in FED. In HS you are judging if the BR interfered with ability to make the play which is primarily the throw. So if it does sail wide or into the outfield, you have to decide if the runner being out of the runner's lane caused the problem.

Now the whole quality throw portion is OBR and what you are judging is did the runner's action create a problem with the F3's ability to catch the throw.

Now remember where first base is and where the runner's lane is. The ONLY portion of the lane that contact's first base is the foul line. All of the rest is in foul ground. What this means is on the last step or two the runner has to come into fair to touch the base. This is the result of the rule not being rewritten after they moved the base. Originally first and third split the foul line so half of first was foul, half fair. It made calling fouls near impossible so they decided to move them all in fair. The problem is now that by losing half a base the runner has no way to touch anymore that the three inches of the foul line. So by accepted custom he is now allowed to step in to touch.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The OP was a Fed question and the quality of the throw is not part of the equation in FED. In HS you are judging if the BR interfered with ability to make the play which is primarily the throw. So if it does sail wide or into the outfield, you have to decide if the runner being out of the runner's lane caused the problem. Now the whole quality throw portion is OBR and what you are judging is did the runner's action create a problem with the F3's ability to catch the throw.

Now remember where first base is and where the runner's lane is. The ONLY portion of the lane that contact's first base is the foul line. All of the rest is in foul ground. What this means is on the last step or two the runner has to come into fair to touch the base. This is the result of the rule not being rewritten after they moved the base. Originally first and third split the foul line so half of first was foul, half fair. It made calling fouls near impossible so they decided to move them all in fair. The problem is now that by losing half a base the runner has no way to touch anymore that the three inches of the foul line. So by accepted custom he is now allowed to step in to touch.

Yeah, and for whatever reason, every single time a throw was air-mailed on a play like this, I've concluded that it's NEVER been the fault of the B/R. In other words, if a fielder is using his noggin, and he can't make a quality throw to 1B because of the B/R's route, then the wise thing for that fielder is to drill said B/R with the ball. NOW I'll have a reason to call INT. I find it ridiculous that anyone can honestly tell you, 'Well, I threw it 15 feet over F3's head because the batter was in the way'. :crazy: At the end of it all, I still have to make the judgment call, and trying to apply judgment like this in a forum is pretty much a fool's errand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, and for whatever reason, every single time a throw was air-mailed on a play like this, I've concluded that it's NEVER been the fault of the B/R. In other words, if a fielder is using his noggin, and he can't make a quality throw to 1B because of the B/R's route, then the wise thing for that fielder is to drill said B/R with the ball. NOW I'll have a reason to call INT. I find it ridiculous that anyone can honestly tell you, 'Well, I threw it 15 feet over F3's head because the batter was in the way'. :DAt the end of it all, I still have to make the judgment call, and trying to apply judgment like this in a forum is pretty much a fool's errand.

Brian;

Agreed, although it is January, so at the moment we are all just fools sitting in front of monitors! At least I'm back above 70 degrees for the next week or two, life is good. :crazy:

PS, leave the cold stuff up north when you head down this way, I want to leave my Jacket at home when I see my first game on February 12!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brian;

Agreed, although it is January, so at the moment we are all just fools sitting in front of monitors! At least I'm back above 70 degrees for the next week or two, life is good. :crazy:

PS, leave the cold stuff up north when you head down this way, I want to leave my Jacket at home when I see my first game on February 12!

It's a deal. I won't be there until the 26th, and will hope that I won't need a jacket, either! I'm already well tired of the cold.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 year later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   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.




×
×
  • Create New...