Questions About Umpire Interference (OBR)

[timelydew]

I'm fairly new to exploring the rules of baseball in-depth, and have a question about how umpire interference works. Well, two questions, actually.

1. Is it the same as base runner interference, where the ball must pass an infielder close by or through that infielder?
2. This comment to rule 5.06... "If a fair ball touches an umpire working in the infield after it has bounded past, or over, the pitcher, it is a dead ball."
    What does "working in the infield" actually mean? Does the ump have to be on the infield grass? On the infield dirt? Can he be on the lip of the outfield grass for this to apply? Is there an actual boundary or line of demarcation? 

[Gfoley4]

Edit: as an aside, please stop posting the same topics in multiple sub-forums. Just post it in one or the other.

 

If the ball passes by an infielder, there cannot be umpire's interference. At the MLB level, the only time you're going to see it is when the second base umpire is in deep B or C with runners on. Here is an example of a situation where it wouldn't be umpire's interference (in this case it was foul when it hit West, but let's pretend it was fair for this situation) 

You would just play the bounce, no interference because West is "not working in the infield" and is behind a fielder.

Here's a crazy play that was correctly ruled not as interference because it struck the pitcher before hitting the umpire. 

 

Here's an example of umpire's interference. The runner on second cannot advance while the B/R gets first base.

 

[timelydew]

18 minutes ago, Gfoley4 said:

Edit: as an aside, please stop posting the same topics in multiple sub-forums. Just post it in one or the other.

 

If the ball passes by an infielder, there cannot be umpire's interference. At the MLB level, the only time you're going to see it is when the second base umpire is in deep B or C with runners on. Here is an example of a situation where it wouldn't be umpire's interference (in this case it was foul when it hit West, but let's pretend it was fair for this situation) 

You would just play the bounce, no interference because West is "not working in the infield" and is behind a fielder.

Here's a crazy play that was correctly ruled not as interference because it struck the pitcher before hitting the umpire. 

 

Here's an example of umpire's interference. The runner on second cannot advance while the B/R gets first base.

 

Yeah, sorry for posting it twice, just having a debate with a friend and wanted the question answered expeditiously.

So, "working in the infield" means actually on the dirt or grass, right? If even a couple inches on the outfield grass, you've passed the infield boundary in relation to interference, correct?

And, for argument's sake, can you picture a ball hitting an ump that didn't pass by an infielder? I.E., the fielders are positioned in such a way that the ball strikes an ump who isn't "working in the infield" and isn't behind a fielder. would this hypothetically be interference?

[maven]

Read "working in the infield" as "working in front of infielders." When a base umpire is "on the line," he'll be behind F3 or F5, and from there cannot interfere. A batted ball striking him there is live and in play.

Dirt, grass, etc. is immaterial.

[Gfoley4]

1 hour ago, timelydew said:

Yeah, sorry for posting it twice, just having a debate with a friend and wanted the question answered expeditiously.

So, "working in the infield" means actually on the dirt or grass, right? If even a couple inches on the outfield grass, you've passed the infield boundary in relation to interference, correct?

And, for argument's sake, can you picture a ball hitting an ump that didn't pass by an infielder? I.E., the fielders are positioned in such a way that the ball strikes an ump who isn't "working in the infield" and isn't behind a fielder. would this hypothetically be interference?

The "working in the infield" is just apart of a comment explaining that the pitcher is not considered an infielder for the purposes of this rule.

 

The actual rules states, 

Quote

Any runner is out when: A fair ball touches a runner or an umpire on fair territory before it touches an infielder including the pitcher, or touches an umpire before it has passed an infielder other than the pitcher; runners advance, if forced.

That's pretty cut and dry

[noumpere]

13 hours ago, Gfoley4 said:

Edit: as an aside, please stop posting the same topics in multiple sub-forums. Just post it in one or the other.

Not as an aside (but perhaps as a hijack) :  The OP has been asked this before, and even responded to one of the requests stating why he did so, and then received a reply indicating why his logic was faulty.  Everyone is entitled to make a mistake, but if it's not corrected, it just becomes a bad habit.

[timelydew]

9 minutes ago, noumpere said:

Not as an aside (but perhaps as a hijack) :  The OP has been asked this before, and even responded to one of the requests stating why he did so, and then received a reply indicating why his logic was faulty.  Everyone is entitled to make a mistake, but if it's not corrected, it just becomes a bad habit.

All right, all right. I got it. Put away the pitchforks.

[timelydew]

12 hours ago, maven said:

Read "working in the infield" as "working in front of infielders." When a base umpire is "on the line," he'll be behind F3 or F5, and from there cannot interfere. A batted ball striking him there is live and in play.

Dirt, grass, etc. is immaterial.

See, I was told otherwise on umpire.org by an experienced ump. This is why it's so hard to reconcile the rules, man.  Some of my exchange....

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Originally Posted by timelydew  So, if he, hypothetically, was barely on the outfield grass with nobody on, he's not considered on the infield? Just making sure.

"I can only imagine an umpire on the outfield grass in two instances...

4 or more man mechanics with the 2nd base umpire outside with no runners on (or an accepted mechanic that would otherwise place him there).

OR, rugrat baseball that has the base umpire work on the outside as opposed to inside.

To answer the question, in that situation, by rule, this would not be INT."

And..

"As noted above, the umpire can be on the grass or on the dirt (and still be considered inside) for the purpose of this rule application. He would likely not be more than a step or two onto the dirt as he would then find himself in the base path..."

[noumpere]

I think the answers you got (as you quoted them here) are consistent.

For one, the Maven's answer was referring (mostly) to the infield grass; the other was referring to the outfield grass.

Second, it doesn't matter by rule.  The reference from the other site was just giving practical examples of how the rule would likley apply when the umpire was on the outfield grass -- 99% of the time if the umpire is on the outfield grass, he's beyond the infielder and it's not INT.

The specific "through or by and immediately behind" type language that's in runner INT is not applicable to UI.

[timelydew]

9 minutes ago, noumpere said:

I think the answers you got (as you quoted them here) are consistent.

For one, the Maven's answer was referring (mostly) to the infield grass; the other was referring to the outfield grass.

Second, it doesn't matter by rule.  The reference from the other site was just giving practical examples of how the rule would likley apply when the umpire was on the outfield grass -- 99% of the time if the umpire is on the outfield grass, he's beyond the infielder and it's not INT.

The specific "through or by and immediately behind" type language that's in runner INT is not applicable to UI.

Right on, that makes a bit more sense (in regards to through and immediately behind). I've done some more research and am inclined to believe that the infield is taken very literally vis a vis the wording and application of the rule. Another post on some random board...

"What part of the field was the ump on when he was hit by the batted ball?

If he was in the outfield, then the ball is live. If he was in the infield, then the ball is dead. You mentioned runners were moving, so I assume he was on the infield, which means the ball was dead." This poster was the rules interpreter and mod of the site.

I do concede that you're correct in saying that 99% of the time, the ump is beyond the infielder and no interference applies anyway. Thanks for replying. I really am sorry about the duplicate posting. I want to be a good citizen of these boards and will act accordingly from now on.

[noumpere]

Again, the answer provided is correct for the 99% of the time when the infield and the umpire's are positioned normally.  The criteria, though, is NOT the umpires specific positioning in the infield or in the outfield.

[timelydew]

10 minutes ago, noumpere said:

Again, the answer provided is correct for the 99% of the time when the infield and the umpire's are positioned normally.  The criteria, though, is NOT the umpires specific positioning in the infield or in the outfield.

"If a fair ball touches an umpire working in the infield after it has bounded past, or over, the pitcher, it is a dead ball."

That is what I was referencing to begin with. That seems to be a pretty specific criterion to me. If he's actually "in the infield," to me, you have a dead ball, period. And the infield ends at the beginning of the outfield grass. Anyway, I'm done with this. As a hockey ref by trade I deal with zones and strict enforcement of them in certain situations. I'm just going by what the rule says and taking it literally. I know it's not the only criteria, but it's an important note to keep in mind along with the other criteria for UI. I don't think I've been expressing myself very clearly. I understand that umpire's positioning isn't the only determining factor.

[noumpere]

Yes -- OBR has 234 (or some such) "known errors" (according to JEA).  And the definition of "infield" might just be one of them (for example, if it were taken literally, the infield fly rule would rarely come into play.  An infield fly is one that can reasonable be caught by an infielder.  AN infielder is one who is positioned in the infield.  The infield is the 90' square defined by the bases.  F3 - F6 rarely position themselves in this square).

The note / comment to which you refer has to be read in conjunction with the other rules (see below), and then you will see that it's, again, just an example:

 

Definition:

(c) 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, or (2) when a
fair ball touches an umpire on fair territory before passing a
fielder.

A ball is dead when:

(6) A fair ball touches a runner or an umpire on fair
territory before it touches an infielder including
the pitcher, or touches an umpire before it has
passed an infielder other than the pitcher; runners
advance, if forced.

[timelydew]

30 minutes ago, noumpere said:

Yes -- OBR has 234 (or some such) "known errors" (according to JEA).  And the definition of "infield" might just be one of them (for example, if it were taken literally, the infield fly rule would rarely come into play.  An infield fly is one that can reasonable be caught by an infielder.  AN infielder is one who is positioned in the infield.  The infield is the 90' square defined by the bases.  F3 - F6 rarely position themselves in this square).

The note / comment to which you refer has to be read in conjunction with the other rules (see below), and then you will see that it's, again, just an example:

 

Definition:

(c) 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, or (2) when a
fair ball touches an umpire on fair territory before passing a
fielder.

A ball is dead when:

(6) A fair ball touches a runner or an umpire on fair
territory before it touches an infielder including
the pitcher, or touches an umpire before it has
passed an infielder other than the pitcher; runners
advance, if forced.

So, in layman's terms, you must adjudge umpire interference in the simplest terms, i.e., whether it passes an infielder or not. Nothing more, nothing less. Say a drive up the middle hits the second base ump working on the edge of the dirt infield, but passed a fielder on its way to doing so: no interference, correct? That little snippet in the comment seemed to lead me astray quite a bit. I didn't think to think of it as just an example and not gospel truth. Basically it's saying that an ump working just behind the pitcher's mound would be liable for interference if it passed the pitcher but not another infielder, and was just providing context. I'm sorry for misunderstanding its context. I've got it now, right?

[timelydew]

39 minutes ago, noumpere said:

The infield is the 90' square defined by the bases. 

 

And man, I was thinking of the infield as including all the dirt before the outfield grass... how wrong I was. I feel dumb now. Thank you for correcting me. I owe ya. I'm just beginning to understand the finer points. This changes everything I was talking about. 

[Richvee]

Use the string theory...Run a string to each infielder. If it hits an umpire before it passes the string, INT. If it passes the string then hits an umpire, play on..

[Jimurray]

33 minutes ago, Richvee said:

Use the string theory...Run a string to each infielder. If it hits an umpire before it passes the string, INT. If it passes the string then hits an umpire, play on..

Maybe string theory wouldn't be correct if corners charged and middle didn't and U2, "in the infield",  got hit by a slash. Maybe the comment @timelydew referenced would work in that case.