Jump to content

Runner Lane Interference or Not?


Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

It's convenient to argue the "quality throw" but let me ask this to the group...IF the batter/runner was compliant, would it have given F3 a chance to field the throw? 

 

I would say that throw could not reasonably retire the runner no where he was. I would also say the rule should be eliminated as it is routinely misscalled both ways. Just call INT if a runner from any base to any base intentionally changes his position to interfere with a thrown ball. Give the batter runner a  straight lane to 1B from the dirt circle. The fielder now has to throw to avoid the runner. The runner cannot read F3 to interfere. But given all rule sets current rules I’m primed to call RLI. I can’t in this instance. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Harry's Hints from Wendlestedt:

"Though a throw does not need to be "true," if there is no possible play on the runner because of where the ball was thrown, there cannot be interference for being outside the running lane. Just because a fielder must leave the bag to catch the throw does not remove the possibility of calling interference for running outside of the running lane" 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are a couple of images with the runner and without the runner (assuming compliance)

Couldn't we say that Voit has a legitimate chance to scoop this throw had the batter/runner been compliant? 

Is there less controversy here because there was no heated argument/ejection?

Or is it as simple as this play was officiated properly and there should be some amendments to Wendelstedt's interpretation?  

 

 

Screen Shot 2020-10-06 at 10.31.04 PM.jpg

Throw22.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

To me the fielder did not move to get to the ball in order to not be run over by the runner.  Had the runner been in the lane I think he had a better chance at actually fielding it. 

At my level ( LL)  boom, boom at full speed yeah Im calling RI.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

Here's another clip with one more angle at the end of the clip. From a distance...maybe it tells a different story? Maybe not?
 

 

thanks John, ....I still have an awful throw ;) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, ArchAngel72 said:

To me the fielder did not move to get to the ball in order to not be run over by the runner.  Had the runner been in the lane I think he had a better chance at actually fielding it. 

At my level ( LL)  boom, boom at full speed yeah Im calling RI.   

I'm probably doing the same.

In slow-mo, it does look like F3 made a full extension and didn't really shy up because of the runner, so I can see an argument for no call.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 I know it doesn't matter in calling this play, but it seems to me the runner would have been  even more in the way of F3 fielding the throw if he were indeed compliant.  

RLI in FED, not in OBR. I don't think the runner caused F3 to not make the play. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Tborze said:

They do it EVERY TIME, INTENTIONALLY!

Call it EVERY TIME and see how fast it stops.

 

I really lean in your direction. There is one reason and one reason only why he's running there. 

I need to add...I HATE F3s footwork on this. He goes right foot and we're probably not talking about this today...or last night. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

I really lean in your direction. There is one reason and one reason only why he's running there. 

I need to add...I HATE F3s footwork on this. He goes right foot and we're probably not talking about this today...or last night. 

I was gonna add, if F3's would just stretch up the line they'd get the call every time, but they're not going to risk injury to get an INT call!

I've called 1 RLI in 10 yrs!  Seems there is 1 every day in MLB, or at least a chance to call 1.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Tborze said:

but they're not going to risk injury to get an INT call!

100% agree with you...he was self preservation on that...he only tried to field it that way b/c his footwork was so awful he was left with no other option. He goes right foot and he can probably catch the throw in flight, out in front.  I'm okay with the no call....but I think the no-call folks are leaning too heavily on a throw that an MLB first baseman probably field 99 out of 100 times with a compliant runner. I might be the only one on the planet who thinks this...but this is a far more complicated call than what some are making it. 

A "quality throw" is not a throw that has to hit F3 in the sternum. It's a throw that could result in the batter/runner being retired without extraneous effort from F3. 

There's some judgment in what that is...but I think many umpires have too high of a standard for a "quality throw" when Wendelstedt even says that a "true throw" is not required especially when the batter/runner know exactly what he's doing. 
 

Harry's Hints from Wendlestedt:

"Though a throw does not need to be "true," if there is no possible play on the runner because of where the ball was thrown, there cannot be interference for being outside the running lane. Just because a fielder must leave the bag to catch the throw does not remove the possibility of calling interference for running outside of the running lane" 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tborze said:

They do it EVERY TIME, INTENTIONALLY!

Call it EVERY TIME and see how fast it stops.

 

It is done all the time at all levels and codes. Most of the time they are going the shortest way to 1B from their start at the plate as most are coached. Some are intentionally drifting to affect F3 especially at the pro level. You can't call it every time because the play is usually made in spite of the violation. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So are we all under agreement that if P1 had drilled the runner in the back that would have been RI ?

 

I mean that would have been a quality throw and catchable at that point,  other than the BR blocking the path to F3 and being out of the running lane.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's do a quick sanity check as this play would pertain to NFHS also?

For some reason I have on my brain that "quality of throw doesn't matter" for FED with this rule?  Where am I getting that.  Of course, the rule doesn't spell that out, but ... for reference, here is 8.4.1 G:
Runner is out when: 
he runs outside the three-foot running lane (last half of the distance from home plate to first base), while the ball is being fielded or thrown to first base; or
  1. This infraction is ignored if it is to avoid a fielder who is attempting to field the batted ball or if the act does not interfere with a fielder or a throw.
  2. The batter runner is considered outside the running lane lines if either foot is outside either line.
DOES FED require a quality throw, or is it spelled out in (1.) ?  
Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as the thrower and the runner are on the same side of the line, a quality throw is not required.  It's in the case book or annual interps somewhere

 

Edit:  See this

 

SITUATION 19: B1 bunts and F2 fields the ball in fair territory in front of home plate. B1 is running in foul territory when F2, in fair territory, throws errantly and hits B1 in the back. B1 continues running and touches first base. RULING: The play stands. F2 made an errant throw. Although B1 was not in the running lane, his position did not interfere with F2’s throw. (8-4-1g Exception)

SITUATION 20: As B1 bunts, F2 fields the ball in front of home plate in fair ground. B1 is running in fair ground as he nears first base. F2 realizes he does not have a line of sight to F3 and tries to lob the ball over B1. F3 leaps but cannot catch the ball. RULING: B1 is out for interference. Although F2 made an errant throw, B1 is guilty of interference by being out of the 3-foot running lane. (8-4-1g)

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, johnnyg08 said:

I really lean in your direction. There is one reason and one reason only why he's running there. 

I need to add...I HATE F3s footwork on this. He goes right foot and we're probably not talking about this today...or last night. 

Fielders (even LH 1B-man) taking a throw from in front of the mound are taught to take the throw with left foot on base.  It sacrifices a stretch, but opens up a target to the chest and mobility to move laterally into fair territory (can't go foul, cause the train's comin through) or knock the ball down in front of them if it's low.  Because the fielder could not do those things, it supports a poor quality in the throw and justifies a no-call.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...