You make the call. Umpire for the day!

[Coachw01]

My two cents...

My understanding was that whenever there was an interference or obstruction the umpires could signal a delayed dead ball which is the right arm straight out with a closed fist. Once the play was over a decision needs to be made on what would have happened had the play not involved interference or an obstruction. This is all while understanding that if a runner on second runs into the SS while making a play on the ball she is called out immediately. In this scenario, I would say that the batter is out based on the caught ball and even though there was contact at first base between the OP and the DP the contact appears to be made based on the errant throw. Without seeing the actual play I think I would be justified in saying that the runner would have returned safely back to first base because of the errant throw and she should be able to remain on first base with there now being two outs.

Where I think this situation could really get sticky is after the girl returned to first, she tried to go to second because the ball when wherever it went. At that point you could have an obstruction situation where she would be sent back to first base.

It's been a few years but I used to umpire a lot of high school softball and again it tough to understand without seeing the actually play. Based on what I've read though I think this is what should/could have happened. Could be wrong though...

 

[coach james]

I agree with this. So, I'm sticking to my original post of obstruction on the d

And again, you cannot obstruct a runner who is already out.

Your right about this, however, the point is that its the defenders job to avoid a collision when the play is in the baseline. The fact that the fault is on the defence is why I'm saying obstruction, regardless of the fact the b/r was out. Had the collision not taken place, it most likely would have resulted in a double play (The defence was arguing this point) I believe that is the topic based on the op.

 

[ms244]

Comp.

But how does the batter/base runner know that she is out? The play happened behind her and the field umpire made no motion or call on the play, therefore the runner kept running to 1B. She still feels that she has a right to both the baseline and the base, which is the direction she was heading. I know that the batter is out, the pitcher caught the ball. However when she threw the ball to the home plate side of 1B which drew F3 off the bag into the runner, how is the runner that was heading back to 1B out? The poor throw by F1 to F3 caused the obstruction/interference, not the runner. The base runner that started the play on 1B would have been out if the throw from F1 to F3 was good, but since it wasn't F3 would have been drawn off the bag anyways.

I understand that it is difficult to explain everything that happened during the play. I thought that I did a good enough job to explain what happened to try to get an understanding on why the call was made the way it was. Reading the comments here there is some that call obstruction, others call it interference, and others say "no call". All based on the same play that I described.

 

[Comp]

My understanding was that whenever there was an interference or obstruction the umpires could signal a delayed dead ball which is the right arm straight out with a closed fist.

Interference is ALWAYS an immediate dead ball with 1 and only 1 exception. If the plate umpire interferes with a catchers throw the call is delayed until the outcome of the throw is known. If the catcher makes the out, the umpire interference is ignored, if the catcher does not make the out it is a dead ball and the runner or runners are returned to the base(s) occupied at the time of the pitch.

 

[Comp]

Comp.

But how does the batter/base runner know that she is out? The play happened behind her and the field umpire made no motion or call on the play, therefore the runner kept running to 1B. She still feels that she has a right to both the baseline and the base, which is the direction she was heading. I know that the batter is out, the pitcher caught the ball. However when she threw the ball to the home plate side of 1B which drew F3 off the bag into the runner, how is the runner that was heading back to 1B out? The poor throw by F1 to F3 caused the obstruction/interference, not the runner. The base runner that started the play on 1B would have been out if the throw from F1 to F3 was good, but since it wasn't F3 would have been drawn off the bag anyways.

I understand that it is difficult to explain everything that happened during the play. I thought that I did a good enough job to explain what happened to try to get an understanding on why the call was made the way it was. Reading the comments here there is some that call obstruction, others call it interference, and others say "no call". All based on the same play that I described.

I believe I was the first post that said no call and that is still my call. As for obstruction, I have said repeatedly there is no possible way you can obstruct a runner who is already out. I dont know why it keeps being mentioned as there is no way it could be used to explain anything in the play. There is absolutely no way a runner who has already been put out can be obstructed and it has absolutely no part of this play. As for interference, you are always going to get a group that feels a runner should just disappear off the face of the earth the moment they are put out, or veer off, or or or or...... The runner had no idea she had been put out as the catch happened behind her. If the throw had been on target and the batter/runner ran over the top of F3, then I could see an argument for interference. But that is not the case, a bad throw by F1 pulled F3 into the batter/runners path and caused the collision. I have nothing, it is a live ball and play continues.

 

[Lenski]

Fair or foul have no bearing whatsoever on the OP.

There is a big difference, as far as the rules go, on fielding a batted ball vs fielding a thrown ball. A fileder is protected while in the act of fielding a batted ball. The OP was not a batted ball, it was a thrown ball.

Think about this...who screwed this play up? The defense makes an errant throw that draws F3 into the path of the retired baserunner who is doing nothing but running to first base. Why should the defense have any protection due to their mistake?

I would really have liked to see this play to make a definitive ruling, but based on what I have read so far, I got a big, fat nothing.

There is a running lane up the first base line for a reason. The BR was not in the running lane, she was in fair territory when the collision is made. Interference on the BR because the collision was made in fair territory, not the running lane.

 

[Comp]

There is a running lane up the first base line for a reason. The BR was not in the running lane, she was in fair territory when the collision is made. Interference on the BR because the collision was made in fair territory, not the running lane.

No double base in the play in question at some point the batter/runner has to come out of the lane to touch the base. Further, as has been stated by several the errant throw is what created the collision. Sorry but I don't see interference in this play.

 

[BretMan]

My understanding was that whenever there was an interference or obstruction the umpires could signal a delayed dead ball which is the right arm straight out with a closed.

It's already noted that except for one rare instance- one that has no relation to this play- interference is not a delayed dead ball. It's an immediate dead ball.

Not pointed out is that the delayed dead ball signal is the left arm extended. So this statement is wrong on two counts.

The fact that the fault is on the defence is why I'm saying obstruction, regardless of the fact the b/r was out.

So, even after having it explained that it is IMPOSSIBLE under any rule in the rule book for this to be obstruction, you're still sticking by your guns.

Reading the comments here there is some that call obstruction, others call it interference, and others say "no call". All based on the same play that I described.

None of the actual umpires in this thread are calling it obstruction or interference. That should tell you something.


A couple of additional thoughts...

There is a rule that says a retired runner can be guilty of interference. But this is generally reserved for plays where the retired player has some reasonable expectation to realize that they've been called out and ample opportunity to react accordingly.

What's a typical home to first running time? Four seconds or less? If a runner is going full speed to first base, then is put out a couple of seconds before getting there, what do you expect them to do? On this play it would take a second or two for the batted ball to reach the fielder before it's caught, then a second or two for the umpire to see the catch and signal it. Even in the best case scenario, this runner is going to have only a couple of seconds between the point where she's called out and the point when she reaches the base.

What would be your reasonable expectation of how this runner, legally running the bases at full speed, should react in those couple of seconds? To immediately stop on a dime? To make an immediate course correction and veer off away from the play? To go *poof* and vanish?

All of those would be UNreasonable expectations. So the rules don't require the runner to do any of them.

As for the fielder getting pulled into the runner's path by a bad throw...Just imagine if runners could be called out for interference whenever a fielder suddenly and unavoidably moves into their path. What a huge advantage this would be for the defense! Jumping into the runner's way would result in both the runner being called out and the play being called dead, which stops any other runners from advancing.

If this was a legal tactic, I'd be coaching my fielders to do it on every play! But, it's not. When the defense initiates the contact in this manner, it's not the runners fault and it's not interference.

 

[Coachw01]

It's already noted that except for one rare instance- one that has no relation to this play- interference is not a delayed dead ball. It's an immediate dead ball.

Not pointed out is that the delayed dead ball signal is the left arm extended. So this statement is wrong on two counts.

Good call on the left arm, my mistake. I believe I knew that just wasn't thinking as a typed.

However, In this case I believe I am going to signal for a delayed dead ball because I believe the runner who was on first base would have returned safely because of the errant throw. The delayed dead ball would be in a situation where the girl who returned to first attempted to go to second after she had come back and tagged at first. At that point it would be my decision as the umpire to allow her second base or to keep her at first because the batter got in the way of the first basemans ability to make a play in the ball. Out or not, it's extremely possible/likely the 'collision' hurt the first basemens ability to make a play on the ball.

So I agree with you it's a live ball but I still believe it's a delayed dead ball situation based on what the runner could do after her return to first base.

Would also say I had the same thought in terms if "strategy" in this situation. This situation definitly creates a 'double play' just by running into someone and there are coaches out there who would do it.

 

[Lenski]

What would be your reasonable expectation of how this runner, legally running the bases at full speed, should react in those couple of seconds? To immediately stop on a dime? To make an immediate course correction and veer off away from the play? To go *poof* and vanish?

....and here's my point of contention. Bret, what is the purpose of the running lane up the first base line? Here is the major league rule. Is the softball rule different?

In running the last half of the distance from home base to first base, while the ball is being fielded to first base, he runs outside (to the right of) the three-foot line, or inside (to the left of) the foul line, and in the umpire's judgment in so doing interferes with the fielder taking the throw at first base, in which case the ball is dead; except that he may run outside (to the right of) the three foot line or inside (to the left of) the foul line to avoid a fielder attempting to field a batted ball; Rule 6.05(k) Comment: The lines marking the three-foot lane are a part of that lane and a batter- runner is required to have both feet within the three-foot lane or on the lines marking the lane. The batter-runner is permitted to exit the three-foot lane by means of a step, stride, reach or slide in the immediate vicinity of first base for the sole purpose of touching first base.