In the early '80's,I umpired HS baseball..I think anyone who umpires has a situational decision that they second guess themselves on from time to time. I thought I would make use of this forum and pass mine along and get some input.

The rules say that a runner coming in contact with a batted ball is out due to interference...this situation came up in a game:

With a runner on second and two out,a batter hit a grounder to the shortstop..the ball carromed off the shortstop's glove and THEN hit the runner,who never stopped and advanced to third.

I made the ruling that since the shortstop had a chance to make a play BEFORE the ball hit the runner,no interference occured and I allowed the runner the base.I consulted with the other umpires,who could see no fault with my reasoning, then spent 10 minutes in an argument with the defensive coach (whose team went on to lose the game),but stood my ground.

Did I make the right call? It has often come to mind since.

Thanks

In the early '80's,I umpired HS baseball..I think anyone who umpires has a situational decision that they second guess themselves on from time to time. I thought I would make use of this forum and pass mine along and get some input.

The rules say that a runner coming in contact with a batted ball is out due to interference...this situation came up in a game:

With a runner on second and two out,a batter hit a grounder to the shortstop..the ball carromed off the shortstop's glove and THEN hit the runner,who never stopped and advanced to third.

I made the ruling that since the shortstop had a chance to make a play BEFORE the ball hit the runner,no interference occurred and I allowed the runner the base.I consulted with the other umpires,who could see no fault with my reasoning, then spent 10 minutes in an argument with the defensive coach (whose team went on to lose the game),but stood my ground.

Did I make the right call? It has often come to mind since.

Thanks

If the SS, was in front of the Runner and made a play on the ball, then the Runner is not out, as you called. Once a fielder, makes a play on the ball, if contact occurs the ball is live and not dead.

 

I believe you made the correct call....I'm not an Umpire, just had plenty of experience, politely disagreeing with them.

 

Even if the SS wasn't in front of the runner, I don't think it would matter. For instance, say the SS was behind the runner and had a ground ball bounce off his chest and caroom forward into a runner going from 2B to 3B - the runner would not be out because the fielder has had an opportunity to field the ball and the runner cannot be reasonably expected to avoid a ricocheting ground ball.

I was always under the impression that once the ball was touched by the defensive team, then the runner couldn't be ruled out by having the ball touch him.

If a ball has touched any defensive player or gone past any defensive player (other than the pitcher) who has a chance to make a play on the ball, then the ball is alive and in play. So long as the runner doesn't intentionally deflect the ball he is fine.

The only mistake I see here is letting a coach argue for 10 minutes!:sssh:

If a ball has touched any defensive player or gone past any defensive player (other than the pitcher) who has a chance to make a play on the ball, then the ball is alive and in play. So long as the runner doesn't intentionally deflect the ball he is fine.

The only mistake I see here is letting a coach argue for 10 minutes!:sssh:

 

This is correct ,all of it .:thumb:

If a ball has touched any defensive player or gone past any defensive player (other than the pitcher) who has a chance to make a play on the ball, then the ball is alive and in play. So long as the runner doesn't intentionally deflect the ball he is fine.

The only mistake I see here is letting a coach argue for 10 minutes!:sssh:

 

Not so sure this is entirely correct.

 

7.09 (m) reads: "It is interference by a batter or runner when a fair ball touches him on fair territory before touching a fielder. If a fair ball goes through, or by an infielder, and touches a runner immediately back of him, or touches the runner after having been deflected by a fielder, the umpires shall not declare the runner out for being touched by a batted ball.

 

In making such decision the umpire must be convinced that the ball passed through, or by, the fielder, and that no other infielder had the chance to make a play on the ball.

 

Let's assume a 1Bman dives for a ground ball but misses and it then strikes the runner. If, in the umpire's judgement, the 2Bman still had a play on that ball, the runner would be declared out. However, if the 1Bman deflects the ball into the runner, the runner would not be out and the ball live (assuming the runner didn't intentionally hit the deflected ball).

 

At least that's how I've always understood the rule.

Not so sure this is entirely correct.

 

7.09 (m) reads: "It is interference by a batter or runner when a fair ball touches him on fair territory before touching a fielder. If a fair ball goes through, or by an infielder, and touches a runner immediately back of him, or touches the runner after having been deflected by a fielder, the umpires shall not declare the runner out for being touched by a batted ball.

 

In making such decision the umpire must be convinced that the ball passed through, or by, the fielder, and that no other infielder had the chance to make a play on the ball.

 

Let's assume a 1Bman dives for a ground ball but misses and it then strikes the runner. If, in the umpire's judgement, the 2Bman still had a play on that ball, the runner would be declared out. However, if the 1Bman deflects the ball into the runner, the runner would not be out and the ball live (assuming the runner didn't intentionally hit the deflected ball).

 

At least that's how I've always understood the rule.

 

I would agree with your interpretation.

 

I'm thinking, though, that it might be different for FED vs OBR.

I would agree with your interpretation.

 

I'm thinking, though, that it might be different for FED vs OBR.

 

Everything is different for FED. Someone once told me (I have no idea if it's true) that there are 9 balks listed in OBR and 37 balks (or something like that) listed for FED.

Not so sure this is entirely correct.

 

7.09 (m) reads: "It is interference by a batter or runner when a fair ball touches him on fair territory before touching a fielder. If a fair ball goes through, or by an infielder, and touches a runner immediately back of him, or touches the runner after having been deflected by a fielder, the umpires shall not declare the runner out for being touched by a batted ball.

 

In making such decision the umpire must be convinced that the ball passed through, or by, the fielder, and that no other infielder had the chance to make a play on the ball.

 

Let's assume a 1Bman dives for a ground ball but misses and it then strikes the runner. If, in the umpire's judgment, the 2Bman still had a play on that ball, the runner would be declared out. However, if the 1Bman deflects the ball into the runner, the runner would not be out and the ball live (assuming the runner didn't intentionally hit the deflected ball).

 

At least that's how I've always understood the rule.

This is correct, but with a ball hit to the SS, can't see how another fielder would have a chance to field the ball. I can if hit to 3B or 1B, as 2B and SS, would be laterally moving.

This is correct, but with a ball hit to the SS, can't see how another fielder would have a chance to field the ball. I can if hit to 3B or 1B, as 2B and SS, would be laterally moving.

 

Probably so, although term "hit to SS" I'm assuming could mean a ground ball towards hole that SS comes in on and 3Bman moves back on (and to his left) and could still have a play if SS misses. Of course, it would then be pretty unlikely that the 2B runner would be that fair down line to be hit with ball.

 

But that's what these threads are for - to discuss the rare and highly unlikely scenarios. :lol:

Probably so, although term "hit to SS" I'm assuming could mean a ground ball towards hole that SS comes in on and 3Bman moves back on (and to his left) and could still have a play if SS misses. Of course, it would then be pretty unlikely that the 2B runner would be that fair down line to be hit with ball.

 

But that's what these threads are for - to discuss the rare and highly unlikely scenarios. :lol:

I'd like to have a runner, who could get hit by a batted ball, that close to 3rd....

Sounds like you made the right call.

FYI Cooperstown - They have reduced the number of balk opporunities in FED.

you made the right call, it sounds like the coach needs to read the rules.:argue::argue::argue: