NCAA Softball Umpires' Use Phone Call Rules Check on Retired Batter-Runner Interference Double Play
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 тра 2021
- Umpires during a Loyola (Chicago) vs Drake University conducted a rules check via cell phone after a retired batter was hit by a catcher's throw in the 1st inning. Article: www.closecallsports.com/2021/...
With none out and one on (R1), Drake's batter popped up a bunt, which was caught by Loyola's catcher, who then threw toward first base in an effort to retire the base runner. However, the catcher's throw hit the retired Drake batter-runner in the back, ultimately resulting in a delay as umpires consulted both a physical copy of the rules book and made a phone call to a supervisor or rules authority.
Although the play under the Official Baseball Rules would likely be deemed legal pursuant to OBR 6.01(a)(5) Comment ("If the batter or a runner continues to advance or returns to attempts to return to their last legally touched base after they have been put out, they shall not by that alone be considered as confusing, hindering, or impeding the fielders"), we note that softball has no such rule.
(Also, see www.closecallsports.com/2017/... for what OBR 6.01(a)(5) Comment is referring to... even if a retired runner is hit by a thrown ball, that alone is not interference.)
Instead, NCAA Softball's definition for interference is "an act that denies a defensive player a reasonable opportunity to make a play (field/throw) anywhere on the playing field. The act may be intentional or unintentional and the ball must have been playable."
Similarly, 12.17.3 states "An offensive player, who no longer has status (a retired member of the offense or a player who has scored), may not interfere with a defensive player making a play on an active runner."
What is your call?
I actually love the idea of letting the coach listen in on the phone call. Idk if it would be a good idea for the MLB or not but taking the umpire as "messenger" out and letting them hear the ruling directly from the source is a really good job by the umpires IMO.
How could you be upset with an ump who goes as far as to make a phone call to make sure the call is right? That’s amazing
The batter was called out at the plate, she then interfered with the play at first... PERIOD! The ball is dead, and the runner is out. End of story.
NCAA softball allows umpires to go to the Rules Book, and if a protest is lodged, they can take it one step further and contact the NCAA National Rules Interpreter. Kudos to this crew for remaining calm and getting it right. A retired runner has no rights to be in the way of a live ball, especially since she decided not to run it out and clearly saw the catcher make the catch
The phone call is probably going either Vickie Van Kleeck, NCAA Secretary-Rules Book Editor or Craig Hyde, NCAA Softball National Coordinator of Umpires.
To me it's the same as hitting a retired runner coming into 2nd on a double play. If there's no opportunity to get out of the way and no intent on the part of the runner, I am not calling a subsequent out.
No way this should be interference. If that's the case, let's just start throwing the ball at retired runners.
Seems the batter not running it out is making this more unusual and more complicated to apply rules. Had the batter not stopped to see if the ball was caught and instead just ran hard to first and been hit in the back with the thrown ball, more people would be inclined to call it a live ball with no interference - especially if she was on the chalk line.
I think this is a great way to discuss seldom used rules no pointing no yelling.
I'm not sure what they expect her to do.. I would have called no interference, dead ball, runner back to 1st, and 1 out.
I don't umpire softball but this seems like a very good training rules video.
My initial thoughts is what the commentators eventually said-it’s a dead ball just like on a drop third strike when the ball bounces off the catcher onto the batter-runner play stops and batter isnout
The catcher had no chance of getting the runner out at first because the batter runner just retired was still on the field. If you expect a retired player to miraculously disappear, then you can call interference. The runner on first should get second because of the poor judgement of the catcher. If the catcher had made an effort to have a good throwing angle, maybe you could call interference, but you can't expect to make a throw through a player. If the rules say this is interference they are wrong and need to be changed.
As a softball and baseball umpire this is one of those things that can really screw with you when you cross over games. Softball regardless we have a double play here. The runner closest to home plate is going to be ruled out for interference on the batter/runner. I don't like this rule at all.... it's almost as bad as the look back rule or the leaving early your out rule.
Here’s my question. If this is interference, then what’s to stop the catcher from deliberately hitting the retired batter, and then claiming interference for an easy double play?
In softball this type of situation is not about what the runner did. What the runner did only matters when determining intentional interference. In this case it only matters where the retired runner was and whether it interfered with a play. Also, in softball you can't just return the runner to first without interference. (If it's not interference, it's a live ball and the runner can advance. If it's interference, the ball is dead and the runner is either out - if no other runners are on - or returned to first.)
I used to umpire youth baseball. When it's unclear what the rulebook really is in a situation, we were taught to make a decision that makes the most sense. In this case, the batter (now out because the catcher caught the bunt attempt) did not intentionally interfere with the catcher's throw to first and was, in fact, in a reasonable position (on the chalk line, heading towards first base) if the bunt had been successful. Further, if the throw had been good to first, it's still questionable if the runner would have gotten back safely or not. Taking all that into consideration, I would have ruled the ball dead when it hit the former batter, put the runner back on first, and continue the game. And, importantly, I would call both managers/coaches onto the field and explain my ruling .
"Might be a different ballgame..." Haha.
I would lean more towards they made the correct call simply because the BR turned around and looked back and saw she made a catch along with a quick out mechanic. In my opinion.
Correct call by the rules, but at some point in time, it is one where the batter runner could do nothing and is against the spirit of the game.