In all his years of umpiring

I bet that @Clyde has never seen this by a pitcher before.

Watch Kendall Graveman turn a highly unusual and incredible unassisted double play | MLB.com

Couple of things...

1.) How do you score that? 1 unassisted, twice?

b.) How come we don't have players with nicknames like Blue Moon anymore?

Couple of things...

 

1.) How do you score that? 1 unassisted, twice?

 

b.) How come we don't have players with nicknames like Blue Moon anymore?

Because LSU isn't the drug of choice anymore.

1UDPFC

I've never seen that before. I'm absolutely amazed that a MLB pitcher would make a dive for the second runner like that. I can't imagine he practices that kind of roll very often, if at all. That's a good way to injure a shoulder if you don't land right.

Props to him!

Ump could have gotten 2nd out even without a tag. Interference by Revere after being tagged out.

Ump could have gotten 2nd out even without a tag. Interference by Revere after being tagged out.

Really? I respect your opinion a lot on things like this, but that'd be a pretty weak call, in my opinion, if it was made. What's the difference between that and someone doing a pop-up slide into second trying to break up a double play? Both guys would be technically out when contact was made, correct?

Revere did nothing wrong (again, in my opinion) when he slid back into third. And since his back was turned to the pitcher, how in the world was he to know the pitcher was going to do a header over top of him to make the tag? If he was facing him and started to get up, you might have a point. But with his back turned? No way.

Really? I respect your opinion a lot on things like this, but that'd be a pretty weak call, in my opinion, if it was made. What's the difference between that and someone doing a pop-up slide into second trying to break up a double play? Both guys would be technically out when contact was made, correct?

 

Revere did nothing wrong (again, in my opinion) when he slid back into third. And since his back was turned to the pitcher, how in the world was he to know the pitcher was going to do a header over top of him to make the tag? If he was facing him and started to get up, you might have a point. But with his back turned? No way.

Intent is not necessary for interference to be called. I don't think it's a slam dunk call here, but I can see how it could have been called in this instance.

Here's a fun compilation of unassisted triple plays...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCABNMNGJlU

Intent is not necessary for interference to be called. I don't think it's a slam dunk call here, but I can see how it could have been called in this instance.

I understand intent is not necessary. However, what I was trying to point out is that what the runner did was nothing out of the normal movement of a pop-up slide into a bag. Heck, even if he didn't pop up, he still could've been considered "in the way". In other words, what could he have done otherwise considering his tagging and sliding into the bag probably took only a second?

Really? I respect your opinion a lot on things like this, but that'd be a pretty weak call, in my opinion, if it was made. What's the difference between that and someone doing a pop-up slide into second trying to break up a double play? Both guys would be technically out when contact was made, correct?

 

Revere did nothing wrong (again, in my opinion) when he slid back into third. And since his back was turned to the pitcher, how in the world was he to know the pitcher was going to do a header over top of him to make the tag? If he was facing him and started to get up, you might have a point. But with his back turned? No way.

Just like the batter interference rule the rulebook does not care about intent. Umpire does not get to take it into account.

With that said I would be stunned if he had called it. My point is that the rulebook allows for it.

I understand intent is not necessary. However, what I was trying to point out is that what the runner did was nothing out of the normal movement of a pop-up slide into a bag. Heck, even if he didn't pop up, he still could've been considered "in the way". In other words, what could he have done otherwise considering his tagging and sliding into the bag probably took only a second?

Again, I don't think interference is a slam dunk call in the situation. However, as the rule is written, I could see how it could be applied in this situation. "Normal movement" is not part of the rule. The only thing that applies is whether the runner that was put out interfered with the fielder attempting to make a play on the other runner, in other words, did the runner get in the fielders way or not.

(5) Any batter or runner who has just been put out, or any runner who has just scored, hinders or impedes any following play being made on a runner. Such runner shall be declared out for the interference of his teammate (see Rule 6.01(j));

I'm not saying I would have called interference in this situation. I'm just saying, it would be tough for me to argue against it, simply based on the way the rule is written.