Interference by R2

[Larry in TN]

LL Intermediate (50/70) tournament.

 

Bases loaded, no outs.

 

BR hits a hard grounder to F6.  R2 interferes with F6 attempting to field the batted ball.  PU calls interference on R2 but play continues.  F6 bobbles the ball but gets the handle on it in time to throw to F3 before BR reaches 1B.  BU calls the BR out.  R1 has progressed to 2B.  R3 has gone home.

 

What's the correct call?  What happens to the BR, R1, and R3?

[clawdad]

LL Intermediate (50/70) tournament.

 

Bases loaded, no outs.

 

BR hits a hard grounder to F6.  R2 interferes with F6 attempting to field the batted ball.  BU calls interference on R2 but play continues.  F6 bobbles the ball but gets the handle on it in time to throw to F3 before BR reaches 1B.  PU calls the BR out.  R1 has progressed to 2B.  R3 has gone home.

 

What's the correct call?  What happens to the BR, R1, and R3?

If, in the umpire's judgment, R2's interference was to break up a double play then you can get the out on BR and R2.  The ball is dead, and runners return to TOP bases.

 

Why did the PU call the BR out? Assuming it's a 2-man crew then the BU should have the responsibility for that call.

[Larry in TN]

My mistake.  I had my BU/PU backwards in the original post which I've now fixed.

 

The PU called the interference on R2.  The BU called the BR out at 1B on an apparent 6-3 ground-out.

 

To get the two outs (R2 and BR) does the interference have to be intentionally?  Can you point me toward the rule that would apply in that situation?  The PU ruled that the interference was unintentional.

 

The umpires, tournament director, and league president were all trying to look up the applicable rule (OT manager was protesting).  I was the official scorer.  There are 13 separate cites for offensive interference in the LL rule book index.  Not easy to find the correct one with all the chaos.  Several of the OT parents/spectators were begging to have their participation in the evenings festivities brought to a early end though their tickets were never punched.

[clawdad]

Gotcha.

 

7.09 (f)  states that the runner must "willfully and deliberately" interfere with "obvious intent" to break up a double play.

 

You said the PU ruled  the interference was unintentional.  I would HTBT, so I won't second guess him.  

 

If that is his ruling, then I have:

R2 out on the interference, and the ball immediately dead.  BR to 1B, and other runners return to TOP bases.  Since original R1 can't return due to BR now being at first, original R1 goes to 2B. No runs score.

 

Bases loaded, 1 out. 

[noumpere]

That's the correct ruling (well under OBR and I assume LL) and even though the book can be confusing when you first start it should take the "umpires, tournament director, and league president" less than a minute to find it (and that assumes it take 45 seconds just to get the book itself lol.)

[mstaylor]

Tell the TD to go to the Play Store and download the LL rulebook index. It will simplify the protest time. 

[Larry in TN]

Tell the TD to go to the Play Store and download the LL rulebook index. It will simplify the protest time. 

 

Very cool!  Still a lot of results for "interference" but it makes it so much easier to search through and find the information you need quickly.  (In this case, we needed the "ball dead" and "runners return")  I also like how it lists the rule number so you can find it quickly in the book for more details.

 

Is there an iOS version?

[mstaylor]

Don't know

[grayhawk]

So what was the ruling on the field?  How was the protest resolved?

[Larry in TN]

So what was the ruling on the field?  How was the protest resolved?

 

Oh, so you want the rest of the story?  

 

PU allowed play to continue instead of calling the dead ball on the interference and F6 was able to complete the 6-3 play on the BR.

 

Umpires and TD settled on "7.08(b)(NOTE:)" which has R2 out but doesn't mention the dead ball or the runners being returned to their respective bases at the time the interference occurred.  The double-play (R2 & BR) was allowed, R3 was allowed to score, and R1 advanced to 2B.

 

The OT Manager's protest was on the Interference call itself.  He kept saying, "How can it be interference if he (F6) made the out on the BR?"  

 

There was a homerun three batters later that made R3 scoring moot but they lost the run that the BR would have scored and, of course, the extra out ended the inning earlier than it should have ended with two runners stranded (R2 & R3).

 

In the end, the final score was 26-17 with the protesting team losing.  The nine-run final deficit kinda took the wind out of their protest sails.  (Might have helped their cause more if they hadn't walked 8 of the first 9 batters in the 11-run first inning.  One of their pitchers walked 7 of the 8 batters he faced with the 8th reaching on a fielders-choice which did not result in a put-out.  That pitcher was the manager's son.)

 

Here's the final line-score from the game.  Game time was 3:19!

 

1 2 3   4 5 6   7   R  H  E

1 0 0   5 0 2   8   26 15 8

3 4 0   5 5 0   0   17 16 5

[Larry in TN]

Oh, yeah...  Next inning, Interference by R2 at F6 again.  That time PU put R3 back on 3B.

[clawdad]

 

Tell the TD to go to the Play Store and download the LL rulebook index. It will simplify the protest time. 

 

Very cool!  Still a lot of results for "interference" but it makes it so much easier to search through and find the information you need quickly.  (In this case, we needed the "ball dead" and "runners return")  I also like how it lists the rule number so you can find it quickly in the book for more details.

 

Is there an iOS version?

 

Yes, the iOS one came out first.  

[clawdad]

 

So what was the ruling on the field?  How was the protest resolved?

 

Oh, so you want the rest of the story?  

 

PU allowed play to continue instead of calling the dead ball on the interference and F6 was able to complete the 6-3 play on the BR.

 

Umpires and TD settled on "7.08(b)(NOTE:)" which has R2 out but doesn't mention the dead ball or the runners being returned to their respective bases at the time the interference occurred.  The double-play (R2 & BR) was allowed, R3 was allowed to score, and R1 advanced to 2B.

 

The OT Manager's protest was on the Interference call itself.  He kept saying, "How can it be interference if he (F6) made the out on the BR?"  

 

There was a homerun three batters later that made R3 scoring moot but they lost the run that the BR would have scored and, of course, the extra out ended the inning earlier than it should have ended with two runners stranded (R2 & R3).

 

In the end, the final score was 26-17 with the protesting team losing.  The nine-run final deficit kinda took the wind out of their protest sails.  (Might have helped their cause more if they hadn't walked 8 of the first 9 batters in the 11-run first inning.  One of their pitchers walked 7 of the 8 batters he faced with the 8th reaching on a fielders-choice which did not result in a put-out.  That pitcher was the manager's son.)

 

Here's the final line-score from the game.  Game time was 3:19!

 

1 2 3   4 5 6   7   R  H  E

1 0 0   5 0 2   8   26 15 8

3 4 0   5 5 0   0   17 16 5

 

If I'm the protesting team manager, there is no way I would accept that ruling.  If the protesting team does not agree with the TD decision, they have every right stop play to move it through the process. Once they go back on the field to begin play, they are unable to protest after the next play/pitch. I would make them go up the chain to the tournament committee in Williamsport.  Their decision is final and binding.

 

You said 3 batters later, a HR was hit.  I am assuming that the 2 batters in between reached base, otherwise there would be 3 outs.  With bases loaded and 1 out (which it should have been after the INT), even if the 2 batters reached on consecutive walks then 2 runs would have scored.  That makes the HR a grand slam to score 4 more.  I know that doesn't amount to enough runs to change the final score, but the momentum swing could have been huge.

[Larry in TN]

If I'm the protesting team manager, there is no way I would accept that ruling.

 

The protesting manager didn't know the rule either so he didn't understand what was wrong with the ruling to make a proper protest.  He was focused on the call of "INT" being wrong, not how the aftermath of the INT was being applied.

 

 

You said 3 batters later, a HR was hit.  I am assuming that the 2 batters in between reached base, otherwise there would be 3 outs.  With bases loaded and 1 out (which it should have been after the INT), even if the 2 batters reached on consecutive walks then 2 runs would have scored.  That makes the HR a grand slam to score 4 more.  I know that doesn't amount to enough runs to change the final score, but the momentum swing could have been huge.

 

There was a single then a walk after the INT call and before the HR.  The only runner who didn't score, but should have, was the BR on the INT play who was called out of 1B but should have been awarded 1B after the dead-ball INT.  The HR was still a grand-slam.  That last out stranded two but that should have only been the second out so no way to know how many more might have scored.

 

That whole inning was a train wreck.  Here's how it went.

 

B1 - Single -- (R1)

B2 - Single -- (R2, R1)

B3 - Single -- (R3, R2, R1)

B4 - R2 out on INT at F6, R3 scored, BR out on the 6-3 -- (R2, 2 Outs)

B5 - Single -- (R2, R1)

B6 - Walk -- (R3, R2, R1)

B7 - Grand Slam

B8 - Single -- (R1)

B9 - Double -- (R3, R1)

B10 - Strikeout -- (3 Outs)

 

Actually, the whole game was a train wreck.  How else would you have a 26-17 final in 7 innings?

[clawdad]

 

 

Actually, the whole game was a train wreck.  How else would you have a 26-17 final in 7 innings?

 

 I agree

[johnnyg08]

Here's the problem w/ protests at many levels of baseball.

The coaches typically don't know enough about the rules to articulate their reasons for protest. They expect the umpire to do that for them...or something along those lines.

The protest committee often knows less about the rules than the coaches.

This is youth baseball. In the end, it was friggin 26-17.

On a side note, what was the game time of this gem? Over 3:30?

[Larry in TN]

On a side note, what was the game time of this gem? Over 3:30?

 

3:19 including the delay that this play called.

 

This was a LL District double-elimination tournament with only three teams participating.  I was a spectator for Game 1 and the official scorer for games 2 through 4.  Scores/times were:

 

Game 1: 18-8, Team N over Team A (Scorer didn't keep time)

Game 2: 15-14, Team G over Team N (3:00)

Game 3: 14-12, Team A over Team N (3:22)

Game 4: 26-17, Team G over Team A (3:19)

 

The State tournament is suppose to start today with six teams in the Intermediate division.  Not sure if they'll get to play with all the rain we've had/are having, though.  I wouldn't be surprised if it is a very short tournament for our winner, Team G, based on the play I saw last weekend from all three teams.