Interference by Retired Runner

[captk]

8-4-1h states that The Batter Runner is out when any runner or retired runner interferes in a way which obviously hinders an obvious double play.

2-30-3states that a retired runner is player of the team at bat who has been put out or who has scored and is still in live-ball area.

So the play is R1 on 1st, B1 hits the ball to F6 who throws the ball to F4, who after tagging 2B, throws to F3 attempting to complete a double play. The throw from F4 strikes R1 who was still 20 feet from the base running between 1B and 2B.

8-4-1g speaks of the runner being out when he intentionally interferes with a throw or thrown ball,... and If, in the judgement of the umpire, a retired runner interferes, and in the judgment of the umpire , another runner could have been put out, the umpire shall declare the runner out.

Can a runner who is running the baseline, and doing as he is legally required to do, be guilty of interfering because in the play above, he became a retired runner once the 1st part of the double play occurred. Is the defense given protection on a thrown ball.

I feel not, but in an associating meeting I was in the minority. Flame Away!

[Rich_Ives]

8-4-1h states that The Batter Runner is out when any runner or retired runner interferes in a way which obviously hinders an obvious double play.

2-30-3states that a retired runner is player of the team at bat who has been put out or who has scored and is still in live-ball area.

So the play is R1 on 1st, B1 hits the ball to F6 who throws the ball to F4, who after tagging 2B, throws to F3 attempting to complete a double play. The throw from F4 strikes R1 who was still 20 feet from the base running between 1B and 2B.

8-4-1g speaks of the runner being out when he intentionally interferes with a throw or thrown ball,... and If, in the judgement of the umpire, a retired runner interferes, and in the judgment of the umpire , another runner could have been put out, the umpire shall declare the runner out.

Can a runner who is running the baseline, and doing as he is legally required to do, be guilty of interfering because in the play above, he became a retired runner once the 1st part of the double play occurred. Is the defense given protection on a thrown ball.

I feel not, but in an associating meeting I was in the minority. Flame Away!

IMHO: If it was interference the fielder could just hit the runner rather than having to throw all the way to first.

But then again FED is strange so it might be an automatic quadruple play.

[CoachJM]

captk,

The text of both the OBR and NCAA rules contain language to the effect that a retired runner continuing to advance shall not, by that act alone, be considered to have interfered.

There is no corresponding language in the FED rule book that either confirms or contradicts the principle. However, there is a FED case play (8.3.3(i) ) that suggests the same principle applies.

It's not interference. I've got nothing but E4 (on the throw), live ball, play the bounce.

Did anyone bring up the Force Play Slide Rule to support the "that's interference" position? Just curious.

JM

[dash_riprock]

Did anyone bring up the Force Play Slide Rule to support the "that's interference" position?

JM

I was waiting for that. Good question.

[dash_riprock]

captk,

It's not interference. I've got nothing but E4 (on the throw), live ball, play the bounce.

JM

Do you have the same result under NCAA rules? Unlike FED, NCAA's FPSR is a "must slide" rule with one exception - veer off. The runner did neither.

[bobjenkins]

Do you have the same result under NCAA rules? Unlike FED, NCAA's FPSR is a "must slide" rule with one exception - veer off. The runner did neither.

I have the same result.

My view is that the FPSR requirements come into play when the runner is close enought to the base that sliding is an option. Then, the runner must slide legally or veer off -- and both are an option in NCAA and FED.

If the runner is farther from the base, then it's only interference if it's intentional.

[captk]

I found a couple of souces, discussing the situation.

1st in the Rules by Topic.
Fundamental # 14 To call interference with a thrown ball, the act must be intentional.

In the FED Football Rule book, there is a list of fundamentals. Is this list for Baseball published anywhere else within the FED system other than in the Baseball Rules by topic.

Of course this still does not address the question of the retired runner being mandated to avoid interfering with the play on the force play. But then, isn't a runner who makes a legal slide, complying with all aspects of 2-23, and takes the fielder out after he himself being forced out on the play intentionally interfering.

The second resource I found is the new "Plays That Trip You Up" from Referee Magazine and NASO. Not an official source I know, but this books addresses this question directly by on page 73. Play 5: With R1 on first, B1 grounds sharply to F6, who tosses to F4 at second for the force. F4's throw to first hits a surprised R1, who is halfway to second. Ruling 5 In NFHS, the play stands.

[hotsam34]

I have the same result.

My view is that the FPSR requirements come into play when the runner is close enought to the base that sliding is an option. Then, the runner must slide legally or veer off -- and both are an option in NCAA and FED.

If the runner is farther from the base, then it's only interference if it's intentional.

As usual, Bob is correct...from the 2006 NFHS Interps:

SITUATION 19: R1 is on first base with no outs. B2 smashes a one-hopper to F6, who flips the ball to F4 to quickly retire R1. F4 then relays the ball to first in an attempt for a double play, but the ball strikes R1, who is in the baseline and less than halfway to second. The ball ricochets into short right field and B2 reaches first safely. RULING: The play stands. This is not a violation of the force-play slide rule by R1. Unless R1 intentionally made a move to interfere with the thrown ball, the ball stays live and in play. (8-4-2b, 8-4-2g)

[captk]

Perfect! Thank you!

[dash_riprock]

As usual, Bob is correct...from the 2006 NFHS Interps:

SITUATION 19: R1 is on first base with no outs. B2 smashes a one-hopper to F6, who flips the ball to F4 to quickly retire R1. F4 then relays the ball to first in an attempt for a double play, but the ball strikes R1, who is in the baseline and less than halfway to second. The ball ricochets into short right field and B2 reaches first safely. RULING: The play stands. This is not a violation of the force-play slide rule by R1. Unless R1 intentionally made a move to interfere with the thrown ball, the ball stays live and in play. (8-4-2b, 8-4-2g)

Not exactly analogous. Less than halfway to 2nd is 50 feet or so from the base. I agree - no FPSR violation possible there. But 20 feet (and closing) is a different matter. That's close enough to potentially alter the play(NCAA)/actions(FED) of the fielder. I don't disagree with Bob's standard of not requiring a slide until sliding is an option, but I add another one for veering off. When the runner becomes out, he should get out of the way or be liable for a FPSR bust. I have a definite maybe - HTBT.

Pure speculation but...

Why did FED choose "less than halfway to second" to describe a non-FPSR violation? Was it because it believes the rule applies when the runner is halfway or closer to the base? Does anyone have the FED discussion when the FPSR was proposed? NCAA?

[Rich_Ives]

Not exactly analogous. Less than halfway to 2nd is 50 feet or so from the base. I agree - no FPSR violation possible there. But 20 feet (and closing) is a different matter. That's close enough to potentially alter the play(NCAA)/actions(FED) of the fielder. I don't disagree with Bob's standard of not requiring a slide until sliding is an option, but I add another one for veering off. When the runner becomes out, he should get out of the way or be liable for a FPSR bust. I have a definite maybe - HTBT.

Pure speculation but...

Why did FED choose "less than halfway to second" to describe a non-FPSR violation? Was it because it believes the rule applies when the runner is halfway or closer to the base? Does anyone have the FED discussion when the FPSR was proposed? NCAA?

FED pays way too much attention to disgruntled parents whining "that's not fair".

[dash_riprock]

FED pays way too much attention to disgruntled parents whining "that's not fair".

NCAA as well? Generally, I believe new rules emanate from coaches.