default
Member
___
The batter was already out from striking out, so they can't be declared out again for interference. ASA 8.7.P covers this specific case:Potatoskins, the ruling is correct by the umpires in that situation. The batter is automatically out and the interference kills the play and all base runners are returned to their bases. R1 did not cause the interference so would not be declared out just would return to 1st base.
The ruling by the umpires was dead ball and the umpires returned R1 to 1st base
OK, now you are confusing me - where do you see a DBO occurring? The batter was out on the dropped third strike, but the ball was still live (i.e. R1 can advance to 2nd still). The ball wasn't dead UNTIL the contact occurred.
You're right...I meant to say dead ball at the time of contact with the ball. The batter was out on the strikeout with 1st base occupied. The runner coming from 1st can advance at her own risk, but becomes a dead ball at the time the batter-runner contacts the ball.
Ball contact becomes a judgement call as to whether it was intentional or unintentional. Unintentional should put the runner back to 1st, while malicious or intentional contact could put her in jeopardy of being called out as well.
I understand the ball is kept live in DMC cases where the catcher is making an unnecessary throw to 1B to get the already retired batter. In the OP's case, where the retired batter kicked the ball, it seems like keeping the ball live would potentially allow the offense to gain an advantage from an action of its own player.Players can unintentionally interfere...and, if they do, it's still interference!
This one is really pretty simple. The only question the umpire has to ask himself is, "Did the player's actions prevent the defender from making a play?".
(Note: By "making a play", the rules mean that the defense had some reasonable and realistic opportunity to record an out, not just merely field the ball.)
If the answer is "Yes", then the ball is dead and the runner closest to home is out.
If the answer is "No", then the ball remains live and there is no additional penalty. ...
I understand the ball is kept live in DMC cases where the catcher is making an unnecessary throw to 1B to get the already retired batter. In the OP's case, where the retired batter kicked the ball, it seems like keeping the ball live would potentially allow the offense to gain an advantage from an action of its own player.
Example: R1 is running with the pitch, so no interference because F2 had no opportunity for a play at 2B. Offense sees the ball is kicked away from fielders, so R1 continues to 3B and makes it safely. Is that right? Is there another determination of interference based on a potential play at 3B?
That sounds reasonable enough and I'm not doubting that's how it should be called.
But I really have to wonder which exact rule (and exact rule number) they are using to say that the ball becomes immediately dead. I can't find anything that directly addresses that.
If the batter had bunted and stepped on the ball in fair territory on the way to 1st, the play would be dead (batter out) and the runner has to go back.
I don't see how this scenario would be any different.
Same as Scooter7's last post - dead ball, batter-runner out for interference and runner has to return to 3B.This kind of reminds me of a play last year. Runner on third, ball four to batter was in dirt, catcher blocks it, ball rolls in front of runner who, in her haste to take her base, unintentionally kicks it down the first base line allowing runner on third to walk in. What's the call beside bad luck?
The runner kicking a ball that bounced off the SS is only interference if it was intentional. The rules give the runner some slack on batted balls that deflect off a fielder because they can't really anticipate it happening or where the ball will go. I don't know of any rules providing similar protection for pitched balls that deflect off the catcher.SoCal - that was my argument, but Ump's treated this play was unintentional contact with ball, that the catcher blocked the ball into the basepath of the runner, and ball live. He said this was akin to a ball hit to shortstop, kicking off her chest into the baseline and runner kicking it. My argument was even that play should be interference if the defensive player still has a play.....
The runner kicking a ball that bounced off the SS is only interference if it was intentional. The rules give the runner some slack on batted balls that deflect off a fielder because they can't really anticipate it happening or where the ball will go. I don't know of any rules providing similar protection for pitched balls that deflect off the catcher.
BTW, the fielder only has the right-of-way on the initial attempt to field the ball. After that, it is obstruction if they impede the runner.