Offsetting Penalties

[JaxRolo]

This is a stupid scenario but lets say R1, ball hit to outfield runner coming to 3rd with the throw coming in. 3rd base coach intentionally interferes with the overthrown ball at the same instant the runner is obstructed by F5.

Is there a correct call for this? Offsetting Penalties Repeat the down? :shakehead:

[spiritumpa]

first third base coach is ejected(that is the easy one) the obstruction happened before R1 reached third. because ball became dead when coach interfered. R1 stays at third. if obstruction happened after R1 reached 3rd R1 is awarded home.

[UmpTTS43]

first third base coach is ejected(that is the easy one) the obstruction happened before R1 reached third. because ball became dead when coach interfered. R1 stays at third. if obstruction happened after R1 reached 3rd R1 is awarded home.

Why is the coach ejected? Penalty is runner is out.

As far as the sitch, it depends on which infraction happened first. As stated, with a play being made on an obstructed runner, the ball is immediately dead. If coach interferes with the ball prior to the obstruction, time is called and the runner is out.

[HokieUmp]

first third base coach is ejected(that is the easy one) the obstruction happened before R1 reached third. because ball became dead when coach interfered. R1 stays at third. if obstruction happened after R1 reached 3rd R1 is awarded home.

I may have been beaten to the punch on this, but "3rd base coach is ejected (that is the easy one)"? Really? Can you tell me where you got that? That didn't sound right to me, so I did the whole OBR pdf file search, looking for "eject," and I can't come up with anything that makes it an automatic EJ for that.

If the interference happens first, R1 is out, and BR is placed at the last base legally obtained at the time of the interference. If the obstruction is first, put R1 at 3rd.

And no, they don't happen at the same time. Yes, they actually could, but not in my game. (It's like the mythical tie at first, or Unicorns. Doesn't exist.) If they happen "at the same time," I'm getting the biggest cock-up on the field. IMO, that's the coach screwing with the throw. I grant others may feel differently on that.

[JaxRolo]

I may have been beaten to the punch on this, but "3rd base coach is ejected (that is the easy one)"? Really? Can you tell me where you got that? That didn't sound right to me, so I did the whole OBR pdf file search, looking for "eject," and I can't come up with anything that makes it an automatic EJ for that.

If the interference happens first, R1 is out, and BR is placed at the last base legally obtained at the time of the interference. If the obstruction is first, put R1 at 3rd.

And no, they don't happen at the same time. Yes, they actually could, but not in my game. (It's like the mythical tie at first, or Unicorns. Doesn't exist.) If they happen "at the same time," I'm getting the biggest cock-up on the field. IMO, that's the coach screwing with the throw. I grant others may feel differently on that.

I have to agree it can't happen at the same time but close. So it is just a matter of deciding which one you want to call. I might have to go with the one that gives me an out.

[jjb]

Tie goes to the Umpire. Find an out someplace...

[UmpTTS43]

I have to agree it can't happen at the same time but close. So it is just a matter of deciding which one you want to call. I might have to go with the one that gives me an out.

C'mon guys. We are impartial arbiters of the rules that have ethics and integrity. Call what is right.

[grayhawk]

I agree that "happening at the same instant" is not really possible, inso much as a human being's ability to see both things happening at the same instant.

Seems to me that if there is an overthrow, then the runner was going to get to third no matter what to coach did to interfere. Since I don't know where the ball would have ended up without the coach's intentional interference, I am NOT awarding the runner home.

I am probably ejecting the coach, since what he did was intentional. What rationale is there for keeping an idiot like that around?

[spiritumpa]

I may have been beaten to the punch on this, but "3rd base coach is ejected (that is the easy one)"? Really? Can you tell me where you got that? That didn't sound right to me, so I did the whole OBR pdf file search, looking for "eject," and I can't come up with anything that makes it an automatic EJ for that.

If the interference happens first, R1 is out, and BR is placed at the last base legally obtained at the time of the interference. If the obstruction is first, put R1 at 3rd.

And no, they don't happen at the same time. Yes, they actually could, but not in my game. (It's like the mythical tie at first, or Unicorns. Doesn't exist.) If they happen "at the same time," I'm getting the biggest cock-up on the field. IMO, that's the coach screwing with the throw. I grant others may feel differently on that.

in the post it sayes the coach intentionally interfered not just interfered

[HokieUmp]

C'mon guys. We are impartial arbiters of the rules that have ethics and integrity. Call what is right.

I don't disagree. But in my post, I did differentiate that the circumstances are usually such that the two events do NOT occur at the same time, and I gave what the rules called for based on that.

The only instance I gave where I might have strayed from "calling what is right" is in the seemingly-rare-but-possible circumstance where the coach messed with the throw while a baseman is obstructing the runner AT THE EXACT SAME MOMENT IN TIME. I'm only saying that I don't acknowledge such a tie, and, as they say "have to umpire." You can't enforce 'em both, since that would lead you call the runner out AND put him on 3rd.

So that's why I made my choice. Not because it gives me an out (although it's a lovely consequence), but because my ethics tell me to penalize the worse violation of the rules. That's the idiot coach. If I had to define it, I'd rather penalize a nonplayer-on-player violation (the coach interfering with a throw) over a player-on-player violation.

But again, that's in the off chance that I see them at the same timeslice.

[HokieUmp]

in the post it sayes the coach intentionally interfered not just interfered

Yes it did, and fair enough. But again, I'm asking: where in the rulebook do you find the rule/approved ruling/interpretation that says that's an "easy" EJ? I'm really not trying to be difficult, but I just want to know how you came up with that.

As I said, I searched the PDF file for "eject," figuring if it's that automatic, I should see something near the "eject" character string that would allow that ruling. I didn't find. Doesn't mean it isn't there; it just means I didn't find it. So, where does that come from?

I mean, I can see an ejection coming, honestly: as I've posted already, if those events occur at the same time, I'm getting the offense for the biggest cock-up. Thus, the runner is out for interference committed by a "teammate." The coach will then go ballistic and/or give me the bullcrap claim it wasn't intentional. I won't change my ruling; he'll say a magic word or phrase, and <Yoink!> Out he goes. But that's not automatic. Inevitable, maybe, but not automatic.

[ukce1861]

in the post it sayes the coach intentionally interfered not just interfered

Based on what I'm seeing in the rule book the only way he can "interfere" with a thrown ball is if he does so intentionally. And a penalty for a coach's interference is provided. Check out the Rule 3.15 Comment and 5.08. If it accidentally touches the coach, the ball is alive - no penalty. If he (intentionally) interferes, then a penalty is provided - the runner is called out. Imposing an additional penalty, other than that specified by the rulebook, seems out of line.

[spiritumpa]

Based on what I'm seeing in the rule book the only way he can "interfere" with a thrown ball is if he does so intentionally. And a penalty for a coach's interference is provided. Check out the Rule 3.15 Comment and 5.08. If it accidentally touches the coach, the ball is alive - no penalty. If he (intentionally) interferes, then a penalty is provided - the runner is called out. Imposing an additional penalty, other than that specified by the rulebook, seems out of line.

far enough--I did not look in the rule book--I WOULD BE WRONG FOR RUNNING THE COACH--but I would feel better if I DID.

[mstaylor]

Maybe I am missing something but if there is interference the obstruction is irrelevent. You are going to call the runner out so how can you award him anything.

[Rich Ives]

Maybe I am missing something but if there is interference the obstruction is irrelevent. You are going to call the runner out so how can you award him anything.

If there was obstruction (OBR) on the runner and there's a play on the runner at the time then the ball is dead at the time of the obstruction - which is a possibility here - thus the interference "never happened".

[mstaylor]

True, hadn't thought about the type A aspect. In thast case it is still simple, if it is type A obstruction and it happenes first then the interference didn't happen. If interference happens first then the runner is out.

[PeteBooth]

Why is the coach ejected? Penalty is runner is out.

As far as the sitch, it depends on which infraction happened first. As stated, with a play being made on an obstructed runner, the ball is immediately dead. If coach interferes with the ball prior to the obstruction, time is called and the runner is out.

From the OP

ball hit to outfield runner coming to 3rd with the throw coming in and runner is obstructed by F5.

I left out the interference part of the equation for right now.

the aforementioned is Type "B" OBS and the play remains Live until a tag attempt is made on the obstructed runner.

Now the 3rd base coach interferes with the throw which is also a delayed ball situation.

Therefore, unless we have type "A" OBS which IMO this OP is not, the runner is out.

The order of events in this case doesn't matter. Even if you did award the runner 3rd base because of the OBS. He would then be called out because of the interference by the 3rd base coach.

As far as an EJ. If it was BLATANT interference as the OP suggests then the 3rd base coach would be EJ'd.

Pete Booth

[mstaylor]

Pete:

If the throw is coming to the base the runner is coming to then that is type A. You don't actually have to have a tag attempt, player misses the ball, to make it type A.

[Rich Ives]

I left out the interference part of the equation for right now.

the aforementioned is Type "B" OBS and the play remains Live until a tag attempt is made on the obstructed runner.

Now the 3rd base coach interferes with the throw which is also a delayed ball situation.

Therefore, unless we have type "A" OBS which IMO this OP is not, the runner is out.

The order of events in this case doesn't matter. Even if you did award the runner 3rd base because of the OBS. He would then be called out because of the interference by the 3rd base coach.

As far as an EJ. If it was BLATANT interference as the OP suggests then the 3rd base coach would be EJ'd.

Pete Booth

If you have a runner coming to third and a throw coming to third you have a play on the runner and type A.

MLBUM 6.21

The first type of obstruction (Official Baseball Rule 7.06(a)) deals with cases when the runner is obstructed WHILE a play is being made on him. Examples of this type of obstruction include:

(1) Runner is obstructed during a rundown.

(2) Runner is obstructed as a fielder is making a direct throw to a base in an attempt to retire that runner.

(3) Batter-runner is obstructed before reaching first base on a ground ball to an infielder.

(4) Any other example where a play is being made directly on the runner at the moment he is obstructed

If you think it is NOT an attempt to retire the runner then you need to go to coaching school.

[PeteBooth]

(2) Runner is obstructed as a fielder is making a direct throw to a base in an attempt to retire that runner.

From the OP

ball hit to outfield runner coming to 3rd with the throw coming in.

Throw coming in WHERE?

The passage you quoted is for professional athletes. if the throw is No-where near third base how can you say that a play is being made on an obstructed runner. Unless the throw is RIGHT ON it's type B OBS because the runner should be allowed to keep advancing at his own risk.

Notice the terminology in the MLBUM direct throw to a base

vs the terminology in the OP the throw coming in.

just because a throw is coming in doesn't translate into the same interp as the MLBUM. Unless the outfielder was Pedro Guerro in his prime or the late Roberto Clemente it's type B

This OP would be type A IF the throw was DIRECT AT F5 and the runner was obstructed. Then I agree call Time and make the award.

Depending upon the age level of the players I doubt that there was a DIRECT throw right to F5.

Pete Booth

[Rich Ives]

From the OP

Throw coming in WHERE?

The passage you quoted is for professional athletes. if the throw is No-where near third base how can you say that a play is being made on an obstructed runner. Unless the throw is RIGHT ON it's type B OBS because the runner should be allowed to keep advancing at his own risk.

Notice the terminology in the MLBUM direct throw to a base

vs the terminology in the OP the throw coming in.

just because a throw is coming in doesn't translate into the same interp as the MLBUM. Unless the outfielder was Pedro Guerro in his prime or the late Roberto Clemente it's type B

This OP would be type A IF the throw was DIRECT AT F5 and the runner was obstructed. Then I agree call Time and make the award.

Depending upon the age level of the players I doubt that there was a DIRECT throw right to F5.

Pete Booth

Pete - go back and read my post again. I said where.

Accuracy of the throw doesn't matter- it's the intent that matters. A play is being made on the runner. That's all that's required.

The "direct to the base" bit means the throw is going to the base, not to a cutoff man or relay man.

Check with one of your local coaches to find a coaching clinic.

Edited September 28, 2010 by Rich Ives

[mstaylor]

Pete:

I have to agree with Rich. Type A doesn't mean you can only give him that base, you can award more is warrented. When you have the obstruction then the ball is dead so the interference doesn't happen. Now if it was a type B then the interference would kill the obstruction.

[PeteBooth]

Pete - go back and read my post again. I said where.

Accuracy of the throw doesn't matter- it's the intent that matters. A play is being made on the runner. That's all that's required.

The "direct to the base" bit means the throw is going to the base, not to a cutoff man or relay man.

Check with one of your local coaches to find a coaching clinic.

Rich no coaching clinic needed. You DO NOT convert Type B into Type A

Example which is the way I am interpreting the OP. In the OP all that was said is throw coming in.

ground ball to outfield. F8 fields the ball and throws the ball to F5, however, in rounding second base R2 is obstructed by F6. At the time of the OBS we had Type "B" because even though the INTENT of the fielder was to throw out R2 the ball was being fielded or the outfielder fielded the ball and started his throwing motion towards F5. The throw to F5 is subsequently a bullseye. It is STILL type B because you do NOT convert Type B into Type A. When F5 makes a tag attempt on R2 NOW we "kill it"

Just because a fielder fields the ball and his intent is to throw out R2 is not Type A. An ACTUAL play on the runner needs to be performed which IMO is what the interp in the MLBUM is referring to.

A play is defined as an act on the part of the defense in putting out a runner. If the throw is off-line etc. what difference does it make what the intent of the fielder was. A PLAY has NOT yet commenced in accordance with the definition, hence Type B OBS.

As the MLBUM interp says the throw has to be in a DIRECT LINE towards the fielder. In the OP it's unclear.

if you remember "back in the day" at eteamz there was a HUGE debate on a similar issue.

FWIW: if this was a FED game the point is moot because ALL OBS is delayed dead and we wait until ALL playing action ceases before enforcing.

Pete Booth

Edited September 28, 2010 by PeteBooth

[Rich Ives]

Rich no coaching clinic needed. You DO NOT convert Type B into Type A

Example which is the way I am interpreting the OP. In the OP all that was said is throw coming in.

ground ball to outfield. F8 fields the ball and throws the ball to F5, however, in rounding second base R2 is obstructed by F6. At the time of the OBS we had Type "B" because even though the INTENT of the fielder was to throw out R2 the ball was being fielded or the outfielder fielded the ball and started his throwing motion towards F5. The throw to F5 is subsequently a bullseye. It is STILL type B because you do NOT convert Type B into Type A. When F5 makes a tag attempt on R2 NOW we "kill it"

Just because a fielder fields the ball and his intent is to throw out R2 is not Type A. An ACTUAL play on the runner needs to be performed which IMO is what the interp in the MLBUM is referring to.

A play is defined as an act on the part of the defense in putting out a runner. If the throw is off-line etc. what difference does it make what the intent of the fielder was. A PLAY has NOT yet commenced in accordance with the definition, hence Type B OBS.

As the MLBUM interp says the throw has to be in a DIRECT LINE towards the fielder. In the OP it's unclear.

if you remember "back in the day" at eteamz there was a HUGE debate on a similar issue.

FWIW: if this was a FED game the point is moot because ALL OBS is delayed dead and we wait until ALL playing action ceases before enforcing.

Pete Booth

PETE! READ THE OP!

" . . ball hit to outfield runner coming to 3rd with the throw coming in."

There's a play on the runner. End of story.

[JaxRolo]

PETE! READ THE OP!

" . . ball hit to outfield runner coming to 3rd with the throw coming in."

There's a play on the runner. End of story.

That's exactly what I meant. I thought it was pretty clear that the throw is coming in to 3rd.