| Eric | -- 07-08-2003 @ 4:33 PM |
|
I'm aware that if a runner hinders the fielder who is making a play on the ball, interference has occurred. However, I have a situation that raises two questions. Batter pops the ball up and the ball is coming down over foul territory, but of course could roll fair, so the batter is running for first. The pitcher is running to try to catch the ball and make the out. Q1. if the running batter gets in the way of running pitcher (who is still 10 feet from where the ball is coming down), is this interference? (Since the runner is focused on running, he doesn't know where the ball is and hence doesn't know where the fielder is trying to get to--not sure if this matters, but I'm not sure where else the runner could go other than to stop or to head way inside the baseline to go around the pitcher.) Q2. If the pitcher gets in the way of the runner and the ball rolls fair, is it obstruction? Two elements confuse this for me. 1. Does it matter that the ball is not over the infield? 2. At what point is the fielder considered to be making a play on the ball or "in the act of fielding" it? (e.g., at the point when he first starts moving toward it and has a reasonable chance of getting to it? at the point where he is planted in the place where he will make the catch? when he is moving toward it but probably couldn't get there in time anyway? Thanks from a novice, Eric
|
|
| Jim_Thompson | -- 07-08-2003 @ 10:16 PM |
|
The batter-runner is entitled to an unobstructed path around the bases AND the fielder is entitled to field the ball. Get a copy of Official Baseball Rules and read the definitions of Interference and Obstruction under Rule 2.00 Definitions. In cases like this, there is no black or white answer; it's strictly umpire judgment. Jim
|
|
| Eric | -- 07-08-2003 @ 11:10 PM |
|
Thanks for the reply Jim. I have the LL rule book in front of me, which is part of what left me confused, especially since the rule book changed to say that "obstruction is the act of any fielder who, while not in possession of the ball, impedes the progress of any runner...." which leads me to conclude that the runner has priority until the fielder actually has the ball, but the interference part speaks of hindering "any fielder attempting to make a play"... which leads me to believe that the fielder has priority if going for the ball. Seems like these are inconsistent. I wish someone could persuade the rule book writers to be clearer on such points...
|
|
| macrostarrphish | -- 07-09-2003 @ 5:41 AM |
|
Eric: This is definitely a judgement call. I was a batter in high school and popped the ball up directly over the first base foul line. I took off running and saw the pitcher stop about five or six feet from the foul line, so I never stopped running and AT THE VERY LAST SECOND HE JUMPED INTO MY BASEPATH. I continued and basically ran him over hard thinking "I had a right to the basepath" and that the ball had carried (curved) into the infield, out of the basepath. I was wrong and the umpire promptly called me out for interference. I never argued and felt, as an umpire with three years experience at that time, that I was lucky for not "maliciously" running over the pitcher (which was a choice I made from the start of my run) and getting the boot. I know what I was thinking as a runner, but had I not stood my ground, felt I was going to be out regardless. I would never teach this and learned my lesson. Just thought everyone would enjoy a "runner's" perspective coming from an umpire of over 20 years... I calls 'um as I sees 'um
|
|
| greybeard | -- 07-09-2003 @ 1:06 PM |
|
Every situation will be different and will require umpire judgment. In the case you describe, with just the pitcher going for the ball, the pitcher is "protected" while attempting to field the ball and the runner must avoid him. The runner can go as far out of the baseline as he needs to because he is not attempting to avoid a tag and, in effect, create his own basepath on his way to first while avoiding the pitcher. I've seen more complicated situations in which the pitcher, catcher and first baseman were all chasing the ball. The poor runner was surrounded on three sides and bumped the pitcher. The plate umpire's judgment was that it was interference and the runner was out. The runner had an option, to run into foul territory and around the first baseman. But, if the pitcher had booted the catch in fair territory, there would have been a strong argument for obstruction by the first baseman.
|
|
| Eric | -- 07-10-2003 @ 12:28 PM |
|
Actually, this one really was more complicated since Pitcher, catcher, and 1st were all going for the ball... I only mentioned the pitcher partly because the pitcher was the one I judged to have the mostly likely play on this ball, and partly because I was trying to simply to understand who had the right of way here. (To which Jim in essense said they both do so use your judgement... glad rules for stop signs and traffic lights are clearer than baseball rules.)
|
|
| Jim_Thompson | -- 07-10-2003 @ 1:29 PM |
|
Eric, I'm an insurance agent and although you say rules for stop signs and traffic lights are clearer than baseball rules, talk to an insured who has been involved in an accident at a stop sign or traffic light where there are no witnesses and the poor law enforcement officer who arrives on the scene has to use his best judgment in deciding who was responsible. Not much difference. Someone is going to be unhappy!! Jim
|
|
| Eric | -- 07-10-2003 @ 1:58 PM |
|
but wait a minute... in the baseball game, the 'police officer' is on the site at the time of the 'accident' so he himself is a witness... so when I witness the runner running for the base and the fielder running for the ball and them slowing each other down, it seems like having established the facts of the case, I should be able to know what to do. But here, 2.0 is telling me that the fielder is obstructing the runner if the fielder doesn't have the ball yet, and 7.09k-l tells me that the runner is interfering if he gets in the way of the fielder going after the ball, and it doesn't seem like one play can be both at once, so which of these definitions takes priority when I pass my judgement?
|
|
| Jim_Thompson | -- 07-10-2003 @ 3:43 PM |
|
Eric, All you can do is witness the action and then make your judgment using the rules ae written to determine who was at fault. It all boils down to your judgment. You have to decide. That's why we umpires get the big bucks. Plays like you describe are not black and white, but a nasty shade of gray and you have to sort it all out in a split second to determine who was wrong. No one said it's easy to umpire so all you can do make the call and live with it. It's always that nasty word "judgment". Jim
|
|
| JoeF | -- 07-10-2003 @ 8:32 PM |
|
That's why these questions need to be asked with more specific information; the Little League rule on obstruction is far different than FED, NCAA, or OBR. In LL, a fielder cannot be in the base path or blocking a base/plate without POSSESSION of the ball, not waiting to make a play, in the vicinity, etc., but with possession. If he doesn't have it, it's obstruction. If a fielder is making a play on a ball and a runner interferes with that attempt, it's interference (unless it's past an initial fielder and no other fielder can make a play on the ball, etc.). Once the fielder no longer has a play on the ball AND he has at least had some opportunity to get out of the way, we're back to obstruction. It's still fun at 54...
|
|
| martdad | -- 07-11-2003 @ 6:32 AM |
|
So Joe, "If a fielder is making a play on a ball and a runner interferes with that attempt, it's interference" INTERFERENCE ON THE RUNNER? "In LL, a fielder cannot be in the base path or blocking a base/plate without POSSESSION of the ball, not waiting to make a play, in the vicinity, etc., but with possession" SO INETEREFERENCE ON THE FIELDER? These seem to contradict each other. The fielder was making a play but NOT in possession. Does the runner have the right of way in the path or is it his obligation to avoid the fielder?
|
|
| NotArguing | -- 07-11-2003 @ 6:44 AM |
|
Martdad, I think the key to the apparent contradiction is "In LL,... " That is, the rules are different in "Little League" as oppposed to Major League Baseball.
|
|
| Bob_on_Whidbey | -- 07-12-2003 @ 12:34 PM |
|
"If a fielder is making a play on a ball and a runner interferes with that attempt, it's interference" INTERFERENCE ON THE RUNNER? I believe this refers to fielding the hit by the batter. "In LL, a fielder cannot be in the base path or blocking a base/plate without POSSESSION of the ball, not waiting to make a play, in the vicinity, etc., but with possession" SO INETEREFERENCE ON THE FIELDER? And this refers to fielding THROWS.
|
|
| Baseball Discussion Group : | http://www.baseball-excellence.com/sbaseballforums/ |
| Topic: | http://www.baseball-excellence.com/sbaseballforums//viewmessages.cfm?Forum=2&Topic=3745 |