Interference...again!!

[TheRogue]

Nearly IDENTICAL situation to the college game last week.

14A ASA tournament. 1-0, bottom of the seventh, 2 outs. Runners at 1st and 2nd. Batter hits a hard 2-hopper to 2nd base. Runner from first has head down going hard to 2nd. Girl playing second base sits back for the ball, runner jumps it on the run. ZERO contact, about 3 feet between the two players. I'm in the 1st base coach's box, so I have a perfect angle.

Girl boots the ball, getting past her. Umpire immediately calls "Interference Ballgame". Of course I went flying out there and was asking where the interference was. His immediate reply, obviously ingrained, "In my judgement there was interference", making it perfectly obvious there would be no appeal. A spirited one-sided discussion took place, every short response from him began with "in my judgement". The head coach asked, "Do you follow college softball" (in relation to the ASU game) his reply was ASA rules are different than college. The plate umpire came out and said since it was a judgement call, he could not over-rule, and walked off shaking his head.

I really have 2 problems with the call.

Number 1, it was the wrong call. When asked what the runner is supposed to do, stop running, lay down on the ground, what?.....he threatened to boot us for the tournament. There was no contact...had the player simply taking one step charging the ball as she should have there would've been contact then it would've been the correct call.

Number 2, a 1-0 game. Pitcher's duel with GREAT defense all day. To end a game like that on a judgement call is absolutely horrible.

Did I mention the umpire was a shorter guy, with a fake-and-bake tan, popping muscles, and tatoos? Maybe possibly the type that might enjoy drawing attention to himself at the right opportunity?

Frustrating.

 

[MTR]

Nearly IDENTICAL situation to the college game last week.

14A ASA tournament. 1-0, bottom of the seventh, 2 outs. Runners at 1st and 2nd. Batter hits a hard 2-hopper to 2nd base. Runner from first has head down going hard to 2nd. Girl playing second base sits back for the ball, runner jumps it on the run. ZERO contact, about 3 feet between the two players. I'm in the 1st base coach's box, so I have a perfect angle.

Girl boots the ball, getting past her. Umpire immediately calls "Interference Ballgame". Of course I went flying out there and was asking where the interference was. His immediate reply, obviously ingrained, "In my judgement there was interference", making it perfectly obvious there would be no appeal.

No, that is where you ask the umpire for his definition of INT. If the statement includes, "she ran in front of the fielder, distracting her" you may now have grounds for a protest.

A spirited one-sided discussion took place, every short response from him began with "in my judgement". The head coach asked, "Do you follow college softball" (in relation to the ASU game) his reply was ASA rules are different than college.

Stupid comment by HC and places him on the same level as an umpire who routinely repeats "in my judgment" to avoid a possible protest.

The plate umpire came out and said since it was a judgement call, he could not over-rule, and walked off shaking his head.

PU should have kept his mouth shut and walked off the field with his partner.

Number 1, it was the wrong call. When asked what the runner is supposed to do, stop running, lay down on the ground, what?.....he threatened to boot us for the tournament.

You are correct, it may have been the wrong call, I wasn't there to see it so I'll stand on your side of the fence for the purpose of this discussion.

There was no contact...had the player simply taking one step charging the ball as she should have there would've been contact then it would've been the correct call.

Too many people throwing around the word "contact" like it means something. It DOESN'T. It could be an indication of INT, but certainly is neither required nor absolute.

Number 2, a 1-0 game. Pitcher's duel with GREAT defense all day. To end a game like that on a judgement call is absolutely horrible.

That is a BS response that, IMO, kills your integrity. You have now given me cause to question your angle of the play. A violation on the last play is no different as the same violation on the first play. If you think there should be, go play hockey.

Did I mention the umpire was a shorter guy, with a fake-and-bake tan, popping muscles, and tatoos? Maybe possibly the type that might enjoy drawing attention to himself at the right opportunity?

Oh, yeah, zip on the intergrity. Think I'll go stand on the other side of that fence now, sounds to me like the umpire could have been right.

Frustrating.

Yep, sure is.

 

[sluggers]

Did I mention the umpire was a shorter guy, with a fake-and-bake tan, popping muscles, and tatoos? Maybe possibly the type that might enjoy drawing attention to himself at the right opportunity?

Ah yes...it was the umpire's fault. It wasn't the booted ground ball, the dropped pop-up, the failure to get the bunt down, the base running error, the pass ball or the walk--it was the mustachioed umpire's fault.

 

[joemcq51]

Couple things stick out. First one is that I do not believe contact has to be made for INT to be called. Not being at the game, I'd probably want to see if R1 made F1 alter her play on the ball in any way. Second, what does FU's height and tatoos have to do with a call, good or bad? Third, aren't all games ended on judgement calls? JMHO

 

[quincy]

I do not get to know the umpires and just pigeonhole them like you.

To help you with players another rule I have is:

The more makeup a player has on the less they are committed to softball.

This rule saves me a lot of time having to evaluate the players.

The way you described the play it sounds like the umpire made the correct call, no contact is needed. Nor does it need to be an intentional act by the runner.

 

[Momo'sDad]

Number 2, a 1-0 game. Pitcher's duel with GREAT defense all day. To end a game like that on a judgement call is absolutely horrible.

As a coach, I want the game to be called the same from beginning to end with respect to the rules, not to the game situation or the stakes involved. I don't want the umpires thinking at all. During a game, they need to call what they see.

As a coach, I could care less what an umpire looks like. In fact, they all look alike to me. The only noteworthy physical difference is that some are quieter than others. I would need a lot more evidence than simply a 1-game anecdote to reach the conclusion that an umpire was attempting to become the focus of the game.

 

[MTR]

I don't want the umpires thinking at all.

Wait a minute!!!

During a game, they need to call what they see.

I agree to a point. I do want umpires to think about the play and possible scenarios that may unfold in front of him/her. I do not want them to be thinking about what could, would or should happen. Just be in position, see it and call it.

 

[LAdad]

Number 1, it was the wrong call. When asked what the runner is supposed to do, stop running, lay down on the ground, what?.....he threatened to boot us for the tournament. There was no contact...had the player simply taking one step charging the ball as she should have there would've been contact then it would've been the correct call.

The player should have taken a step forward? Why exactly? Because that would have been the best way to field the ball? In whose opinion? Please show the rule that explains interference only counts if, in the opposing coach's view, the fielder made a model play.

While the NCAA may have created the impression (though not the rule) that contact is necessary, fortunately the ASA has not.

 

[Lozza]

Jumping over the ball is a classic example of int. I would have made the same call.

 

[MTR]

Jumping over the ball is a classic example of int. I would have made the same call.

And you may be right where you are, but not in ISF, NCAA, NFHS, ASA, etc. While the defense has the right of way to field any batted ball, the runner does not forfeit their right to legally advance.