Prepare for 2014: Play 7

[maven]

SITUATION: R1, R3, no outs. R1 breaks for 2B as part of a double steal. As F2 throws down to retire R1, the PU interferes with F2's throw, but F2 manages to make a strong throw. F4 comes up to cut off the throw and try to make a play on R3, when R1 slaps the ball out of his glove.

 

RULING:??

[Mike Prince]

In OBR the play is dead at the point of umpire interference and all runners return.  5.09 (b)

 

Not sure of other rule sets.

[noumpere]

In OBR the play is dead at the point of umpire interference and all runners return.  5.09 (b)

 

Not sure of other rule sets.

That's not correct.  This type of UI is a delayed dead ball in all codes (or at least treated as such if you go by the "theres no such thing in OBR" tenet).

 

If R1 is close enough to interfere then you still can't tell for sure whether the initial throw would retire R1.  So, get R1 out on the interference and return R3.

 

If its really some weird play where F4 cuts it off and then starts to run toward R3 and then R1 cuts way to the middle -- well, the ball would be dead by then so no interference but I'd think strongly about EJ R1.

[JaxRolo]

We already discussed this scenario at great lengths!

[Mike Prince]

Hmm...so my rulebook (2012 was readily accessible so I looked it up there to check) is wrong?  It is clearly written out there.

 

Sorry Jax, I wasn't in the previous thread so I'm not sure of what you are trying to say.

 

Edit - I do see where the interference is ignored if the runner is retired by the throw.  But that didn't happen here...

Edited February 4, 2014 by Mike Prince

[Mike Prince]

Never mind I found the old thread and answer on my own (right next to the huge pile of off-season rust).  So as soon as the throw is cut off, the play is dead and interference is enforced.

 

Glad the title of the thread is "Prepare for 2014..." - I have clearly shown I am not yet prepared LOL

[maven]

We already discussed this scenario at great lengths!

 

We did? Sorry about that, no recollection of it...

[JaxRolo]

 

We already discussed this scenario at great lengths!

 

We did? Sorry about that, no recollection of it...

 

That's what happens when you get old!

[maven]

 

 

We already discussed this scenario at great lengths!

 

We did? Sorry about that, no recollection of it...

 

That's what happens when you get old!

 

 

...or called to testify to Congress.

[cookie]

SITUATION: R1, R3, no outs. R1 breaks for 2B as part of a double steal. As F2 throws down to retire R1, the PU interferes with F2's throw, but F2 manages to make a strong throw. F4 comes up to cut off the throw and try to make a play on R3, when R1 slaps the ball out of his glove.

 

RULING:??

As soon as the initial throw is caught w/o an out being recorded, I would make the ball dead. (There was no intention to play on R1.) Return runners to TOP bases, batter still up.

[UmpTTS43]

Searching. Where can I find the old thread?

[Mike Prince]

Troy - this is one of the threads I found (and the one I think JaxRolo is referring to)

 

http://umpire-empire.com/index.php/topic/55617-need-rule-cite-umpire-interference/?hl=%2Bumpire+%2Binterference

[UmpTTS43]

Thx Mike, but that doesn't address the original op

[UmpTTS43]

Don't know about other thread. If F4 had possession of the ball, and during a tag attempt on R1, R1 slapped the ball out of F4s glove, I would get the INT. Furthermore, if the INT prevented F4 from retiring R1, in some way, on the initial throw, I'm getting the INT. If R1 goes after F4, after he cuts it off, and it is apparent that no play was going to be made on R1, I would eject for unsportsmanlike conduct. Replacement would then be at first. Just because "time" is called doesn't negate an appropriate penalty for the player being an ass.