UI or nothing?

[Kevin_K]

Varsity baseball - Fed Rules; R1 & R2 double steal w/ less than two outs.

 

Right handed B1 takes pitch over the inside corner for a strike. F2 receives the ball,  and then steps back and to his left to throw around B1 in an attempt to retire R1 at 3B. As F2 plants his foot, he steps on my left foot, stumbles as he throws to F5 covering the bag, and ends up on the ground. I never moved my feet as I hammered a strike. R1 is safe without much of a play and as F2 is sitting on the ground, he looks to the dugout for help saying,"I stepped on his foot."

 

Waddya got? 

[MRG9999]

Nothing "Rub of the green"

Nothing "Rub of the green"

[afaber12]

2.00 Interference
© Umpire's interference occurs (1) when a plate umpire hinders, impedes or prevents a catcher's throw attempting to prevent a stolen base or retire a runner on a pick-off play

 

5.09 The ball becomes dead and runners advance one base, or return to their bases, without liablility to be put out, when-

(b) The plate umpire interferes with the catcher's throw attempting to prevent a stolen base or retire a runner on a pick-off play; runners may not advance.
NOTE: The interference shall be disregarded if the catcher's throw retires the runner.

 

Clearly the throw didn't retire a runner, and the throw was definitely hindered by the plate umpire. So "That's interference" pointing to your own head. When the runner's safe call "Time: that's interference" and return the runners.

[maven]

Yep. Umpire INT. If the throw retires the runner, ignore. Otherwise, kill it and send 'em back. 5.1.2C

 

Good news is: the strike counts.

[JaxRolo]

I agree send the runner back

[mjr_2013]

 

2.00 Interference

© Umpire's interference occurs (1) when a plate umpire hinders, impedes or prevents a catcher's throw attempting to prevent a stolen base or retire a runner on a pick-off play

 

5.09 The ball becomes dead and runners advance one base, or return to their bases, without liablility to be put out, when-

(b) The plate umpire interferes with the catcher's throw attempting to prevent a stolen base or retire a runner on a pick-off play; runners may not advance.

NOTE: The interference shall be disregarded if the catcher's throw retires the runner.

 

Clearly the throw didn't retire a runner, and the throw was definitely hindered by the plate umpire. So "That's interference" pointing to your own head. When the runner's safe call "Time: that's interference" and return the runners.

 

Are there different mechanics for this?

 

I've been taught it's a vocal "That's interference!" with a point to where it occurred (in this case your foot) and then if it is going to be enforced, you step out from behind the plate with " Time! Umpire Interference! You! Second base! You! First base!" while patting your chest with your palm to indicate it's on you.

[Richvee]

@Kevin_K

So it happened to you too?

http://umpire-empire.com/index.php/topic/57498-umpire-interference/?hl=%2Bumpire+%2Binterference

[charliej47]

IF you did not move, you have nothing.  If you moved and caused the bad throw, then you have UI.

 

You cannot make yourself disappear.  

[1dumbquestion]

IF you did not move, you have nothing.  If you moved and caused the bad throw, then you have UI.

 

You cannot make yourself disappear.  

interp to back this up? If BU in "B" is hit by a batted ball but didn't move is it not int?

[noumpere]

IF you did not move, you have nothing.  If you moved and caused the bad throw, then you have UI.

 

You cannot make yourself disappear.  

The rule is in place precisely because the umpire cannot disappear.  Because he needs to be close to the catcher, there are times when the umpire will get in the way.  The rule provides for a "do over" (and not a penalty to either side) if the umpire affects the play.

[Umpire in Chief]

 

Clearly the throw didn't retire a runner, and the throw was definitely hindered by the plate umpire. So "That's interference" pointing to your own head. When the runner's safe call "Time: that's interference" and return the runners.

Are there different mechanics for this?

 

I've been taught it's a vocal "That's interference!" with a point to where it occurred (in this case your foot) and then if it is going to be enforced, you step out from behind the plate with " Time! Umpire Interference! You! Second base! You! First base!" while patting your chest with your palm to indicate it's on you.

 

 

Please be careful with this I just want everybody reading to understand that this is a delayed dead ball. We must wait for the result of the play.

[Richvee]

IF you did not move, you have nothing.  If you moved and caused the bad throw, then you have UI.

 

You cannot make yourself disappear.  

I can't buy this. If I don't move and F2 cocks his arm back to throw to 2nd and hits my chest that's UI all day. I don't have to move to cause it. 

[ALStripes17]

IF you did not move, you have nothing. If you moved and caused the bad throw, then you have UI.

You cannot make yourself disappear.

interp to back this up? If BU in "B" is hit by a batted ball but didn't move is it not int?

That scenario is addressed in a separate rule. The OP is describing a specific play covered in the rule book under Umpire INT

[maven]

IF you did not move, you have nothing.  If you moved and caused the bad throw, then you have UI.

 

You cannot make yourself disappear.  

 

I think you're reading the rule too literally, if you're saying that a stationary PU can never be liable for UI. He can be, and we should not be punishing the defense for our being in the way.

[Kevin_K]

Remember it if Fed rules, not OBR.

 

NFHS 2.21.2  It is umpire interference when he inadvertently moves so as to ­hinder a catcher's attempt to throw, or when a fair ball touches an umpire as in 5-1-1f, or thrown ball as in 5-1-1g.

 

NFHS  5.1.2 . . . It is a delayed dead ball when:

a. there is interference by a batter (Exception 7-3-5 Penalty),

1. When the batter interferes with the catcher attempting to play on a runner, if an out does not result at the end of the catcher's throw, the ball shall become dead immediately.

b. a catcher or any fielder obstructs a batter or runner; or obstructs the ball through use of detached player equipment (8-3-3);

c. umpire interferes with the catcher who is attempting to throw;

 

 

 

Then, consulting the casebook....

 

5.1.2 SITUATION B:

With runners on third and first base, a double steal is called. R1 attempts to steal home, and the umpire interferes with F2's throw to second base.

RULING: The umpire gives the dead-ball signal. If R2 is not put out on F2's throw, the umpire shall declare the ball dead, and R1 and R2 must return to the base they occupied before the interference.

[Kevin_K]

I don't like the rule as it's written for Fed. The definition indicates that the umpire must inadvertently move to be interference, The additional rules refer to umpire interference, which would seem to tie back to the FED defintiion of UI.

 

As I read it, because I did not move, I did not interfere. I let it play out. Not even a peep from DHC. If the game was under OBR, I would have called interference on myself under a delayed dead ball.

 

Are there any case plays that delineate movement versus no movement by PU under FED? Am I reading the definition incorrectly? I have a message into my chapter interpreter and an assignor. I'll let you know what their versions are when I get them

 

When @Richvee posted this a short while ago, I went into the rule book to look at the definitions and case plays, and as luck would have it., the same thing occurs to me.

[zoops]

IMO, although the rule is not written real well in FED, you interfered with the catcher's ability to make a play and that is all that matters.  Send them back.  

[Replacematt]

It's impossible to inadvertently move unless some outside force causes you to move. If you take the FED rule literally, absent a strong wind or earthquake, it's impossible to have UI on PU.

[maven]

It's impossible to inadvertently move unless some outside force causes you to move. If you take the FED rule literally, absent a strong wind or earthquake, it's impossible to have UI on PU.

 

Matt: the hindrance, not the motion, is inadvertent (at least, I hope it is!). The modifier is misplaced.

 

FED is well known for its syntactical incompetence.

[Replacematt]

 

It's impossible to inadvertently move unless some outside force causes you to move. If you take the FED rule literally, absent a strong wind or earthquake, it's impossible to have UI on PU.

 

Matt: the hindrance, not the motion, is inadvertent (at least, I hope it is!). The modifier is misplaced.

 

FED is well known for its syntactical incompetence.

 

 

That was kinda the point...

[Richvee]

I E mailed our association interpreter on this. Here's my original email and his answer.

 

 

 By coincidence, an umpire friend of mine and I had the same thing happen to us in games this week. We have differing opinions on whether or not umpire interference should be called here. 

 

Runner on 2nd, right hand batter. Runner stealing 3rd on the pitch. Catcher catches the pitch and jumps to his left to make a throw behind the batter who is in the box. As the catcher moves, he stumbles on the umpire's left foot. Is this umpire interference if the umpire has not moved? (assuming of course the throw does not retire the runner)

 

The reason for the discussion is the way umpire interference is defined in 2.21.2

 

ART. 2 . . . It is umpire interference when he inadvertently moves so as to ­hinder a catcher's attempt to throw, .....

 

So the question is, should we call umpire interference if the catcher initiates the contact with the umpire by moving to his left or right and the umpire has not moved from his original spot? 

 

 

His answer

 

 

An umpire should not call interference, if the catcher initiates the contact (as he did in this play which you described).  If the umpire's movement causes a catcher to be interfered with on his throw, then it is a delayed dead ball because of U1's interference.

[Rich Ives]

You need a new interpreter.

[Replacematt]

You need a new interpreter.

And a clinic on plate mechanics. Two in the same association in one week?

[Richvee]

 

You need a new interpreter.

And a clinic on plate mechanics. Two in the same association in one week?

 

So you've never had an F2 step back and to his left and make contact while you were calling a pitch? You're my hero.

[maven]

So you've never had an F2 step back and to his left and make contact while you were calling a pitch? You're my hero.

Rich, I take Matt's point to be that UI is or should be quite rare. For an umpire to have it might prompt him to review his mechanics to see whether he might have avoided it (and the answer might be "no").

 

The odds are strongly against having 2 in an association in 1 week. Of course, as we all know, in baseball the improbable happens all the time!

 

I expect you're aware of all this and just took issue with the snark.