Dave Martinez's Nats Lose on Walk Off RLI No-Call

[Lindsay]

In a flashback to the 2019 World Series Nationals manager Dave Martinez argued with a plate umpire in Houston, this time as the Astros walked off Washington on a throwing error and runner's lane interference no-call at first base. So, was the call correct or not?

With one out and the bases loaded, Astros batter Jake Meyers grounded to Nats shortstop CJ Abrams, who threw to catcher Keibert Ruiz to force out Astros R3 Kyle Tucker at home. Nationals catcher Ruiz's throw to first base to attempt an inning-ending double play got away from first baseman Michael Chavis, no-called by HP Umpire Jeremy Riggs...but was this no-call correct?

Official Baseball Rule 5.09(a)(11) states, "A batter is out when, in running the last half of the distance from home base to first base, while the ball is being fielded to first base, they run outside (to the right of) the three-foot line, or inside (to the left of) the foul line, and in the umpire’s judgment in so doing interfere with the fielder taking the throw at first base, in which case the ball is dead."

Replays indicate batter-runner Meyers failed to run within the runner's lane and—by virtue of the fielder's mitt making contact with Meyers' helmet as the the fielder attempted to field the catcher's throw—likely interfered pursuant to OBR 5.09(a)(11). Therefore, this appeared to be an incorrect runner's lane interference no-call.

Video as follows:

Alternate Link: Stros walk off Nats on RLI no-call...should it have been a double play?

View the full article

[Jimurray]

6 hours ago, Lindsay said:

In a flashback to the 2019 World Series Nationals manager Dave Martinez argued with a plate umpire in Houston, this time as the Astros walked off Washington on a throwing error and runner's lane interference no-call at first base. So, was the call correct or not?

 

With one out and the bases loaded, Astros batter Jake Meyers grounded to Nats shortstop CJ Abrams, who threw to catcher Keibert Ruiz to force out Astros R3 Kyle Tucker at home. Nationals catcher Ruiz's throw to first base to attempt an inning-ending double play got away from first baseman Michael Chavis, no-called by HP Umpire Jeremy Riggs...but was this no-call correct?

 

Official Baseball Rule 5.09(a)(11) states, "A batter is out when, in running the last half of the distance from home base to first base, while the ball is being fielded to first base, they run outside (to the right of) the three-foot line, or inside (to the left of) the foul line, and in the umpire’s judgment in so doing interfere with the fielder taking the throw at first base, in which case the ball is dead."

Replays indicate batter-runner Meyers failed to run within the runner's lane and—by virtue of the fielder's mitt making contact with Meyers' helmet as the the fielder attempted to field the catcher's throw—likely interfered pursuant to OBR 5.09(a)(11). Therefore, this appeared to be an incorrect runner's lane interference no-call.

 

Video as follows:

Alternate Link: Stros walk off Nats on RLI no-call...should it have been a double play?

View the full article

As I have espoused before, get rid of the rule, consistently called and no called improperly. Require F2 to find a throwing lane just as F3 would have to on a reverse DP.  Use the current runner INT rule and add the criteria that runner deviation from a straight line to 1B  from his exit of the dirt circle will be considered intent to interfere and will be an out whether there was hindrance or not. 

[beerguy55]

1 hour ago, Jimurray said:

As I have espoused before, get rid of the rule, consistently called and no called improperly. Require F2 to find a throwing lane just as F3 would have to on a reverse DP.  Use the current runner INT rule and add the criteria that runner deviation from a straight line to 1B  from his exit of the dirt circle will be considered intent to interfere and will be an out whether there was hindrance or not. 

It is indeed a dumb/bad rule.

The runners are allowed to take any path they want between any of the other bases...R3 can find the path most likely to get in the way of F5's throw home...R1 for F3's throw to second...as long as there's no intentional swerve or hand waving, they're good...but we make the batter/runner adhere to a different standard for some magical stretch of 45 feet?

Not to mention it just encourages catchers to throw into the runner's back to get a call...and when that does happen the umpire is just as likely to call it correctly, or not correctly, for a large number of valid reasons.

Just drop the rule, and maintain the same standard all base runners have in all other scenarios...it's nonsensical as is.

And, honestly, have you EVER called or non-called this play, correctly or not, where it didn't end up in an argument??

[Mussgrass]

I agree with you guys. And, aren't the catcher and F3 taught to go either inside or outside to be able to throw a completed pass?

[The Man in Blue]

Better suggestion ... keep the rule and add the double first-base so the runner has NO reason not to be in the lane.

[Thunderheads]

11 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

Better suggestion ... keep the rule and add the double first-base so the runner has NO reason not to be in the lane.

the 'softball safety bag' will never happen!   Although the concept within this discussion does have some sense to it ....

[beerguy55]

22 hours ago, Mussgrass said:

I agree with you guys. And, aren't the catcher and F3 taught to go either inside or outside to be able to throw a completed pass?

Yes, and...if the ball is in fair territory, the fielder is in fair territory, F3 is taught to go into fair territory to receive the throw...the runner will run in fair territory to try to get into the way.  Likewise, on a U3k the ball is in foul territory, F3 is going into foul territory...where do these right-handed batters who claim they need to run in fair territory to keep a straight line end up?

On a ground ball to F5 he's in fair territory, F2 aligns in fair territory...where is a savvy baserunner going to run?

Bottom line for me, there's plenty of room to make/receive the throw if it's true...if it tails into the runner, throw better.