Jump to content


Photo

Interference on Double Play Attempt?


7 replies to this topic

#1 Packerbacker

Packerbacker

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 45 posts

Posted 12 June 2017 - 03:03 PM

Standard 4-6-3 double play attempt.
R1 is easily out at 2B and continues to advance directly to 2B, but is still not on top of 2B (R1 did not do anything extra beyond just running to the base).
F6 sees him, double pumps, and finally gets off a late throw to 1B.
U2 declares batter/runner out for R1's interference, since R1 did not slide or veer off to the side.

#2 amutz

amutz

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 887 posts
  • LocationNorCal

Posted 12 June 2017 - 03:09 PM

Runner should slide as coming in standing up can indeed be called interference.  



#3 Lou Barbieri

Lou Barbieri

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 3,066 posts
  • LocationThe Villages, Florida

Posted 12 June 2017 - 03:18 PM

7.09(e)
Judgement call by the umpire.
There is no "requirement" to slide/duck/veer but that's the normal practice.
Coming in standing up is a good way to get hit by the throw!

#4 Packerbacker

Packerbacker

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 45 posts

Posted 12 June 2017 - 03:34 PM

After doing some homework.

The RIM says (my emphasis added):

                 

     When a runner is moving toward second base on a double play ball, there is no requirement for the runner to slide. The fielder must expect the runner      to be there. As long as the runner is moving toward the base, there would generally be no interference.

                  

     If the batter or a runner continues to advance after he/she has been put out, he/she shall not by that act alone be considered as confusing, hindering or      impending the fielders.

 

And the Case Book says:

 

RULE 7.08(a)(3) SITUATION.  As a result of the batter hitting a ground ball to the shortstop, the runner from first base goes into second base standing up.  The fielder drops the ball and does not record the out.  The defense argues that the runner should be called out for not sliding on an obvious out.

            RULING: There is no “must slide” rule in any division of Little League baseball or softball.  A runner is never required to slide at any base.



#5 amutz

amutz

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 887 posts
  • LocationNorCal

Posted 12 June 2017 - 03:55 PM

FWIW I've seen the call; it's a judgement call about not hindering the play, as Lou said.   It's not a 'must slide' rule misconception.    

If the runner has enough time to react to the play and get out of the way, he should.  

On the small diamond the runner is often already in a spot where sliding is the obvious way to come into the base and standing up can be viewed as intentionally interfering.



#6 richives

richives

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,116 posts
  • LocationOwego, NY

Posted 12 June 2017 - 03:55 PM

Runner should slide as coming in standing up can indeed be called interference.  

 

Nope. Not in LL/OBR.  In FED yes, but not here.

 

See Packerbacker's post.  The RIM comments he posted can also be found in the OBR rules.

 

The key statement is:  If the batter or a runner continues to advance after he/she has been put out, he/she shall not by that act alone be considered as confusing, hindering or impending the fielders.

 

With the exception of "/she" it is word for word from OBR.

 

The only judgement is did the runner do something other than just continue running.



#7 richives

richives

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,116 posts
  • LocationOwego, NY

Posted 12 June 2017 - 08:51 PM

FWIW I've seen the call; it's a judgement call about not hindering the play, as Lou said. It's not a 'must slide' rule misconception.
If the runner has enough time to react to the play and get out of the way, he should.
On the small diamond the runner is often already in a spot where sliding is the obvious way to come into the base and standing up can be viewed as intentionally interfering.


Not if you understand the rules.

#8 amutz

amutz

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 887 posts
  • LocationNorCal

Posted 13 June 2017 - 06:27 AM

Not if you understand the rules.

 

Fair enough; I've seen it called this way but the call was not necessarily correct.





Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users