It did impact the play,... the runner's failure to use the lane caused the first baseman to lose control of the ball.
*****Official 2019 World Series Thread*****
- Thread starter LuteHawk
- Start date
It did impact the play,... the runner's failure to use the lane caused the first baseman to lose control of the ball.
Except that there's no way you can make an assumption that he'd have been safe. At best, it would've been a bang-bang play. The ball hit him in the back at pretty much the same time that his hip hit the glove of the first baseman. At that time, his foot is still in the air.
Very simply, if he'd have been running where he was supposed to be running, he'd have been safe. Since he wasn't, he is out.
He interfered with the first basemen before he got to the bag. Judgement call, not reviewable. Simple call since the runner was inside the line...
First thought that came to mind is that the players need the field bases to be elevated in order to advance to the next base at full speed. Would likely see players slip trying to make that turn without being able to use the base as a push off point or they wouldn't be able to run as hard and maybe not advance as they are able to now. I do agree that there could be some kind of technology implemented to sense when the bag is contacted to maybe make plays a little more obvious. Similar to how I think there should be a sensor along the goal line and something in the football to detect when that plane is broken. If the tech is there I say use it.
It would also cause major issues for the first baseman. There, you pretty much put your foot on it by feel; you get to the base, with your foot right beside it. Then read the throw & step to it to maximize your reach. You never see a decent first baseman look down to the bag once he's positioned himself, unless a bad throw makes him jump/more, and he has to find it again.
Also, he'd end up with his foot on the bag itself, increasing the chances that either he gets spiked, or he trips the base runner.
"The batter-runner is permitted to exit the threefoot 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."
He was striding for the bag - he was allowed to be there.
But he didn't leave the three-foot lane while striding for the bag. He was never in it. He ran the entire way in fair territory, and he interfered with the defensive player's attempt to make the play.
It is exceedingly simple to not get called for runner's interference on a play like that. Run in the area in which the rule says you are supposed to run. If you don't, and you make contact with either the defensive player or get hit by a thrown ball, you are out, it is a dead ball, and all baserunners return to where they were prior to the pitch.
But he's allowed to reach for the base. He didn't interfere with the play while running down the line. He was hit by the glove as he was stepping on the bag - as he's allowed to do legally.
The rule wasn't written to protect the fielder from a poor throw, it was to keep the runner from intentionally interfering.
Had he run in foul territory the whole way and then stepped in like he was allowed to the glove still would have hit him. That's why it was a terrible judgement call.
It's pretty much not possible to run the whole way down in the runner's lane, then end up where he was when he got hit with the ball. You'd have to take an awkward, half- sideways stride.
Plus, if he had run down the line in foul territory, where he's supposed to, the ump's call almost certainly would've been "no interference" (and that would've been the correct call).
But he didn't do that. He ran the whole way on the wrong side of the line; when he got plunked, the ump correctly called him out.
Plus, if he had run down the line in foul territory, where he's supposed to, the ump's call almost certainly would've been "no interference" (and that would've been the correct call).
But he didn't do that. He ran the whole way on the wrong side of the line; when he got plunked, the ump correctly called him out.
Didn't see it that way at all. Thought he was clearly safe, they had no chance to make the out, and it was a chickenshite call.
The head official upstairs apparently saw it that way too and decided to make everything right. He sent Karma to the plate to jack that homer and she has a wicked swing.
This is the wording from the rule book:
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;
Buck's comment was something to the tune of "he's allowed to run there." Well, no - not really. While you can pretty much run where you want as long as you aren't doing so to avoid a tag, if you choose to run from home to first & you aren't in the running lane, you're out if you interfere with the fielder taking the throw at first base.
So yeah, he's allowed to run there - but there's a potential penalty if running there impacts a play. It did, so he found out the penalty.
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;
Buck's comment was something to the tune of "he's allowed to run there." Well, no - not really. While you can pretty much run where you want as long as you aren't doing so to avoid a tag, if you choose to run from home to first & you aren't in the running lane, you're out if you interfere with the fielder taking the throw at first base.
So yeah, he's allowed to run there - but there's a potential penalty if running there impacts a play. It did, so he found out the penalty.
How can you say he didn't interfere with the play; the ball hit him, and the fielder's glove ends up on the ground. It wasn't tee ball, where the ball gets hit and the little kids all drop their hats and gloves while they co a rugby scrum around where it stops.
The comment from Smoltz that stood out to me is that pitchers are taught to throw at the runner to try to draw that call.
When I used to play softball I seem to recall an orange base(in foul territory) that was to the right of the white bag(in fair territory). When there was a play at first, the runner had to use the orange bag. This effectively eliminated all of this claptrap about running inside the base line, interference, etc.
Given how upset so many people are about this...why not actually solve the problem and put in the orange bags and then obligate the runner to run to the right of the baseline and hit the orange bag. Problem solved!
It's no wonder we cannot agree on meaty issues like healthcare, immigration, etc, as a society we cannot even come up with an obvious, EASY solution to a simple problem like this one.
(Thanks Obama!)
BTW...I only vaguely recall those orange bases as I normally was well into my homerun trot by the time I got to first base, having just dropped my bat too, and would just lightly touch the white bag on my leisurely trip around the bases. I assume that those orange bags were for the schlock's that were trying to beat out infield singles and comebackers to the pitcher...but I did see them.
Given how upset so many people are about this...why not actually solve the problem and put in the orange bags and then obligate the runner to run to the right of the baseline and hit the orange bag. Problem solved!
It's no wonder we cannot agree on meaty issues like healthcare, immigration, etc, as a society we cannot even come up with an obvious, EASY solution to a simple problem like this one.
(Thanks Obama!) BTW...I only vaguely recall those orange bases as I normally was well into my homerun trot by the time I got to first base, having just dropped my bat too, and would just lightly touch the white bag on my leisurely trip around the bases.
I assume that those orange bags were for the schlock's that were trying to beat out infield singles and comebackers to the pitcher...but I did see them.
Absolutely. My coach when I was 13 taught pitchers & catchers that (it's generally more likely to happen on a sacrifice bunt). If the guy is running on the inside of the line, hit him square in the back with it.
There's a difference between interfering with and being involved with. Interfering with is a judgement call for that very reason. The baserunner has a right to the base. The ball and glove were in a position that the runner could not advance to the base without contact. That's not the runner's fault.
Again, if he'd gone down the baseline in the runners lane (where he's supposed to be running) it's a near certainty that the would not have been called for interference.
Because, you know, he was running where he was supposed to be running.
Off topic but yeah Josh Hamilton should have just offed himself when he tried to commit suicide....
Because the rule clearly states that you are supposed to run on the foul territory side of that line?
I mean, it’s not a suggestion. It’s a rule.
Ump is squeezing the Nats and Grienke is getting every call on the corner. So inconsistent. Wake me up when the automated strike zone is implemented.
Howie Kendrick! Former Cedar Rapids Kernel!
Weird how that’s changed. Nats now getting called strikes where the ball is literally in the batters box.
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
2025 Florida Three-Star DT Enjoys Iowa Visit, Schedules Official
- Latest: Eliot Clough