Game ends on Runner Interference

[afaber12]

You can call whatever you like. I am just sharing how the OBR rule is to be interpreted and enforced. 

 

​... which is unless the thrown ball's trajectory is altered by an intentional act by the runner, interference should not be called.

Just like with running lane interference: if the batter-runner interferes with the throw while outside of the running lane then he's out, but only when both things occur. If he'd been running in the lane and the throw hits him in the back he's fine. If he's outside of the lane but he doesn't hinder the play - or there's no play being made on him - he's fine.

In the OP if the runner makes an intentional attempt to hinder the ball's ability to reach the intended target of the throw but fails, that's nothing. If the runner hinders the ball unintentionally while otherwise behaving as a runner should, that's nothing. It's only if the runner makes an intentional act to hinder the ball and actually hinders that he should be called out for interfering.

[johnnyg08]

@UmpTTS43 & @@afaber12 I enjoy this debate.  Troy, I've never heard it interpreted that way before.  I do know that slapping at the glove in an attempt to dislodge the baseball is an automatic out even if the ball does not become dislodged...so there is likely something to what you're saying.

Until I started processing this thread, I was in afaber12's camp all day long.  Good discussion fellas!

[noumpere]

You can call whatever you like. I am just sharing how the OBR rule is to be interpreted and enforced.

 

​Do you have a source for that?  I'd like it to be true, but I can't recall a source that says it.

[maven]

​Do you have a source for that?  I'd like it to be true, but I can't recall a source that says it.

​I agree with Troy: contact is not necessary for INT, only hindrance. Intentionally waving your arms is distracting and makes the fielder's job more difficult, which is hindrance. Interference.

[zm1283]

​I agree with Troy: contact is not necessary for INT, only hindrance. Intentionally waving your arms is distracting and makes the fielder's job more difficult, which is hindrance. Interference.

​But the rule says that interference with a thrown BALL must be intentional. Not the fielder. 

I am in faber's camp on this until I see an interpretation to the contrary. I don't have my BRD with me or I would look now. 

[maven]

​But the rule says that interference with a thrown BALL must be intentional. Not the fielder. 

I am in faber's camp on this until I see an interpretation to the contrary. I don't have my BRD with me or I would look now. 

​I can't recommend hanging your hat on that. The rule also says that interference with a batted BALL need not be intentional: so if R1 crashes into F4 without touching the ball, that's not INT?

You're emphasizing the wrong word. It's INT with a BATTED ball vs. INT with a THROWN ball. Neither one need involve contact with the ball. Or, to put it otherwise, it's the fielder who's hindered in INT, not the ball (though one way to hinder the fielder is by contacting the ball).

[noumpere]

​I can't recommend hanging your hat on that. The rule also says that interference with a batted BALL need not be intentional: so if R1 crashes into F4 without touching the ball, that's not INT?

You're emphasizing the wrong word. It's INT with a BATTED ball vs. INT with a THROWN ball. Neither one need involve contact with the ball. Or, to put it otherwise, it's the fielder who's hindered in INT, not the ball (though one way to hinder the fielder is by contacting the ball).

​Well, there is another clause about "interfering with a fielder making a play on a batted ball".

 

And, in general, I think the distinction between "interfering with a fielder" and "interfering with the ball" is a good one -- a batted ball that's been deflected, is one example.

[lawump]

J/R:  "it is interference by a runner on a thrown ball only if such runner

(1) Commits an intentional action to interfere that disregards his try to get to a base safely, and

(2) such action hinders a fielder trying to throw or trying to tag.

NOTE:  Interference on a thrown ball does not require contact.  

A runner must must prove by his actions and the way he positions himself that his intent is to reach and stay on a base safely.  Actions that disregard this intent and show, rather, an intent to interfere include: ... (c) waving arms.

Example:  R1, one out.  The second baseman fields a grounder and tosses to second where the shortstop tags the bag and is about to throw to first when R1...waves his arms but does not contact ball or fielder.  (Ruling:)  (T)he runner has shown by his actions and positioning that his intent is not to reach and stay on second safely, but to interfere with the shorstop's try to throw.  (This is interference.)

Edited May 22, 2015 by lawump
typo

[Senor Azul]

From the 2014 PBUC in Section 7.1 on page 66:

While contact may occur between a fielder and runner during a tag attempt, a runner is not allowed to use his hands or arms to commit an obviously malicious or unsportsmanlike act--such as grabbing, tackling, intentionally slapping at the baseball, punching, kicking, flagrantly using his arms or forearms, etc.--to commit an intentional act of interference unrelated to running the bases. Further, if in the judgment of the umpire such intentional act was to prevent a double play, the umpire would rule the batter-runner out as well. Depending on the severity of the infraction, it is possible the player may be ejected for such conduct.

[Senor Azul]

From the Wendelstedt rules interpretation manual in section 9.3.9 on page 181:

Intentional interference on a fielder with the ball--If a runner commits an intentional act of interference with his arms, hands, legs, or feet unrelated to running the bases...

Enforcement: When the runner intentionally interferes with the fielder, the umpire will call and signal interference and then call time. The runner who created the interference is out. All other runners return to their bases at the time of the interference, unless the batter-runner has not yet reached first base; in which case they return to their original bases.

[jpperez14]

I have called interference on guys running to second throwing their hands up while the second base touches second and turns to throw it to first. I agree with it being hindrance, say had the catcher missed the ball or dropped after he threw his hands up. 

I've had a partner call runners interference on a ground ball to shortstop where he stutter stepped and took off right before the ball got to him and he ruled he hinder the fielder's ability to cleanly field it. 

What about hindering the fielder's ability to field a throw ball? Wouldn't it still be the same?

[zm1283]

Some of these situations/plays are getting away from what actually happened in the video. 

I do appreciate lawump's interpretation, except it says that it has to hinder a fielder trying to throw or trying to tag. In the original video, the runner definitely doesn't hinder the thrower since the ball was already in the air. I guess you just have to decide if the waving of the arms interfered with the fielder taking the throw, even if the ball isn't touched. 

[basejester]

2.0

INTERFERENCE
(a) Offensive interference is an act by the team at bat which interferes with,
obstructs, impedes, hinders or confuses any fielder attempting to make a play.
If the umpire declares the batter, batter-runner, or a runner out for interference,
all other runners shall return to the last base that was in the judgment of the
umpire, legally touched at the time of the interference, unless otherwise provided
by these rules.

 

7.09 It is interference by a batter or a runner when—

(j) He fails to avoid a fielder who is attempting to field a batted ball, or intentionally
interferes with a thrown ball, provided that if two or more fielders attempt to field a
batted ball, and the runner comes in contact with one or more of them, the umpire
shall determine which fielder is entitled to the benefit of this rule, and shall not
declare the runner out for coming in contact with a fielder other than the one the
umpire determines to be entitled to field such a ball;

 

[basejester]

The way I read the actual rule, interfering with a thrown ball is different than interfering with fielders throwing or catching the ball.  If this runner didn't touch the ball, that's only attempted interference.  Like throwing of the glove and missing the ball.

[johnnyg08]

I can see grabbing the interference on the waving of the arms.  

[lawump]

I was taught at umpire school (and the PBUC camp) to call interference if the fielder waves his arms on a thrown ball.  By training, the interference that occurred in the video in the original post was an easy one for a professional umpire to call.

The runner waves his arm/hand when the ball was in flight and he was located between the ball and the fielder who was to receive the throw.  They run drills at umpire school with this exact play and they want you (the student) to call interference.

Interference with a thrown ball does NOT require that actual contact with the ball (or fielder) be made in OBR.  See the J/R reference in my post above.

Edited May 26, 2015 by lawump

[johnnyg08]

I was taught at umpire school (and the PBUC camp) to call interference if the fielder waves his arms on a thrown ball.  By training, the interference that occurred in the video in the original post was an easy one for a professional umpire to call.

The runner waves his arm/hand when the ball was in flight and he was located between the ball and the fielder who was to receive the throw.  They run drills at umpire school with this exact play and they want you (the student) to call interference.

Interference with a thrown ball does NOT require that actual contact with the ball (or fielder) be made in OBR.  See the J/R reference in my post above.

​Sums it up for me (as well as what Troy and some others have posted).

Waving of the arms is an intentional act to hinder or confuse...I'll get that all day now.   

I was in the other camp at the beginning of this thread.  

Thanks for clearing it up fellas!  

[noumpere]

Me, too.

 

Thanks

[johnnyg08]

bump, bump, this is hot on facebook right now.