USA: Runner Interference or not?

[buckyswider]

USA softball rules.  (Although as is common, if codes disagree please point it out for those who work multiple rulesets).

R1 on first, one out.  Hard one hopper to 1B/F3.  As R1 is getting close to F3, ball clanks off of F3's glove and back towards the plate- ends up about 4 or 5 feet in front of F3.  As F3 starts to stride forward to retrieve the ball, R1 collides with F3.

I made no call, which of course elicited lots of noise from the defensive team.  Am I right to consider this a "deflected ball" as described in USA 8.7(J)(4) or could I conceivably had extended the protection afforded  in 8.7(J)(1) to F3?

 

SECTION 7 - THE RUNNER IS OUT

.

.

.

J. When a runner interferes:
1 With a fielder attempting to field a batted fair ball or a foul fly ball, or
2 With a fielder attempting to throw the ball, or
3 With a thrown ball.
Effect:
a The ball is dead.
b The runner is out.
c The batter-runner is awarded first base.
d Runners must return to the last base touched at the time of the interference.
e If the interference, in the umpire's judgment, is an attempt to prevent a double
play and occurs before the runner is put out, the immediate trailing runner
shall also be called out.
f If the interference prevents the fielder from catching a routine fly ball, fair or
foul, with ordinary effort, the batter is also out.
4 Intentionally with any defensive player having the opportunity to make an out
with the deflected batted ball.

[buckyswider]

p.s. my hands may or may not have made it to about stomach level before my brain decided on "no call", which may have been a little impetus for the defense's ire

(yes, i was working solo)

[BigBlue4u]

The standard guideline is that a fielder is protected for a step and a reach.  Based on that guideline, your play is interference with the fielder. 

[buckyswider]

31 minutes ago, BigBlue4u said:

The standard guideline is that a fielder is protected for a step and a reach.  Based on that guideline, your play is interference with the fielder. 

Thanks for the reply BB!  Do you have specific knowledge that this is also a USA/ASA thing?  Based on your response, I did some googling on the phrase, and there's a few other threads (none here) where they debate this and the consensus seems to be it's only a FED thing.   And not just pushing the issue because, as much as I want to have been right tonight, that ship has sailed and I want to make sure I'm right NEXT time.  Wondering if maybe this is something I should submit to USA for their monthly rules clarification newsletter...

[buckyswider]

Although it's a bit dated (from the USA March 2014 interpretations newsletter), it appears my call is correct as per USA interpretations.  (Well, maybe not- maybe I should've DDB'd an obstruction!).  

PLAY: With R1 on 2B, B2 hits a ground ball to F6 who tries to field the ball and bobbles it. R1, trying to advance to 3B, attempts to get around F6 who is picking up the deflected batted ball. In doing so, R1 bumps F6 advancing to 3B. The umpire calls “dead ball” and calls R1 out for interference because the ball has not passed F6 and F6 still had an opportunity to make an out on B2.
Ruling: Incorrect ruling. If protested correctly, the umpire should reverse his ruling and “obstruction” should be called since this interference was not intentional. When a runner intentionally interferes with any defensive player having the opportunity to make an out with the deflected batted ball, the ball is dead and the runner is out. All other runners must return to the last base touched at the time of the interference. Rule 8, Section 7J[4]

 

USA has an index of all their rule clarifications, and I didn't see this one initially because the text didn't specifically say anything about "Deflected" like the other one I went to (where it deflects from one player to another)- this one just is titled "Interference on Runner".  But I happened to notice the 8,7J[4] reference in the index so I checked it out and, lo and behold, it's extremely similar to my play.  

[The Man in Blue]

USA Softball 2022 8-7-J(4)

Rule 8

Section 7: The runner is out ...

Subsection J: When a runner interferes ... 

Part 4: Intentionally with any defensive player having the opportunity to make an out with the deflected batted ball. Effect: a The ball is dead. b The runner is out. c The batter-runner is awarded first base. d Runners must return to the last base touched at the time of the interference.

 

So ... you have two questions to ask yourself:

1.) Was it intentional?

2.) Did the defensive player have an opportunity at an out after the deflection?

 

If you answer "No" to either of those questions, you have obstruction, not interference.  "That's nothing" is a cop out that doesn't exist.

This is also emphasized in the Rules Supplement section for Interference.

[buckyswider]

Yep, that's why I said "maybe I should've DDB'd an obstruction". Revisionist history and all that, but I'd like to think I would've come back to that had it been consequential to the eventual outcome of the play...but as it was, F3 gave up all efforts to retrieve the ball and instead was chirping for interference.  So R1 never broke stride and got to second without a play.  Still though, yep, when my brain decided it wasn't INT I should've stuck out my right fist.  

[The Man in Blue]

Left fist. 

😉

In NFHS, the "step and reach" provision is not specific to a potential interference/obstruction call.  It comes from a definition of "initial play" that is provided in the Fed book ...

Rule 2 DEFINITIONS

ART. 3 . . . Initial Play. A fielder is considered to be making an initial play on a fair batted ball when she:

a. Has a reasonable chance to gain control of a ground ball that no other fielder (except the pitcher) has touched. (8-6-10a)

b. Has a reasonable chance to catch the ball in flight or catch the ball in flight after it touches another fielder.

c. Fails to gain control of the batted ball and is within a step and a reach (in any direction) of the spot of the initial contact.

ALSO NOTE: NFHS does NOT contain the "intentional" requirement that USA does.