Strange situation - I think Blue made a mistake

[Daddylawman]

This happened under ASA rules.

R1 on 1st. B1 hits ground ball to shortstop. Shortstop throws to second baseman covering 2nd. Second baseman turns to throw to first. R1 is about 12-15 feet from the bag, not in a place to slide. Throw hits R1 in the helmet.

Umpire calls B1 out because "R1 should have gotten out of the way for safety reasons". Umpire admits that R1 was not close enough to slide, but says she was responsible for getting out of the way of the throw.

I always thought that the fielder had to "clear" the runner in this situation.

What's the right call.

[lvtwft]

I am not expert but I think the ump got it right there. The runner is the one that needs to get out of the way by getting down, ducking, running toward the outfield or whatever it may be...IMO

[ASAPAump]

I am not expert but I think the ump got it right there. The runner is the one that needs to get out of the way by getting down, ducking, running toward the outfield or whatever it may be...IMO

Yes. This is a judgement call, and if the umpire judged that the runner interfered, then the umpire had it correct. This is interference by an already retired runner. The penalty is that the runner closest to home is declared out. In this case, the runner closest to home must have been the batter-runner.

[SnocatzDad]

I am not expert but I think the ump got it right there. The runner is the one that needs to get out of the way by getting down, ducking, running toward the outfield or whatever it may be...IMO

Yes. This is a judgement call, and if the umpire judged that the runner interfered, then the umpire had it correct. This is interference by an already retired runner. The penalty is that the runner closest to home is declared out. In this case, the runner closest to home must have been the batter-runner.

B.S. Unless you clearly saw runner change direction to interfere with the throw this is nothing, live ball play on. This isn't dodgeball, runner isn't required to dissappear or clear the throwing lane for the fielder.

I understand your defending what the umpire "might" have called, since neither of us saw the play, but the OP didn't state anything about runner attempting to interfere. If the onus was really on the retired runner you would have F6 beaning retired runners every time looking for the interference call.

[Daddylawman]

Just to clarify - the umpire agreed that R1 was heading straight at the base, was not close enough to slide, and did not intentionally interfere with the throw. His full explanation was that he had the right to call her out "for safety reasons"

[Steve M]

Just to clarify - the umpire agreed that R1 was heading straight at the base, was not close enough to slide, and did not intentionally interfere with the throw. His full explanation was that he had the right to call her out "for safety reasons"

That retired runner is not expected or required to just disappear. Absent any "active" interference, then interfeence by the retired runner is the wrong call.

[anonlooker]

Keep in mind that most 2bs are taught footwork designed to create a clear throwing lane to first. This usually assumes the runner is headed straight to 2nd base, because in a DP scenario, if the runner is running well off the straight path she is putting herself at risk of the INT call. It's not like she's rounding the bag on the way to 3rd.

In practice, most girls don't want to get hit in the head and will find a way to avoid the throw.

It would be nice if someone with a rule book would provide a citation, but I'd say the runner isn't responsible to disappear, but isn't allowed to deliberately change course to break up the throw either.

Being a judgement call, I'd hope if the blue saw the 2b create a clear path for the throw, he'd/she'd have INT if the runner gets in the way.

[ASAPAump]

B.S. Unless you clearly saw runner change direction to interfere with the throw this is nothing, live ball play on.

Guys, for those of you who think that there must be an intentional act of interference, you are just completely wrong. We do not judge intent, as the rule for interference does not require such. Very few rules in the book include intent anymore. One such rule is intentionally kicking a ball that has deflected off of an infielder. This is not one of those cases.

I can't tell the runner where to be, but I can tell her where not to be, and that is in the way of the play.

[lvtwft]

This has the some similarities as a previous discussion we had:
B1 takes a pitch and steps out of the box to get her sign, R1 on 3rd gets a big lead and C tries to throw to 3rd hits B1 in head with the throw down to 3rd. B1 out...
My understanding is only if the umpire thought the player hit the b1 on purpose would it not be an out..Same concept

[hit4power]

It would be nice if someone with a rule book would provide a citation, but I'd say the runner isn't responsible to disappear, but isn't allowed to deliberately change course to break up the throw either.

I think the relevant rule in ASA is 8-7-P. "When after being declared out, or after scoring, an offensive player interferes with a defensive player's opportunity to make a play on another runner.

Effect: the ball is dead. The runner closest to home plate at the time of the interference is out."

My book is a few years old so that may have been updated but I don't think so. As pointed out above, intent is not a requirement to have interference, nor is contact. (See definition of interference in ASA rule 1).

We had this sitch come up in HS ball earlier this year. R1 on first, ball hit to F6, toss to F4 covering 2B for the force, retiring R1. F4 then had to double clutch her throw to F3 at 1B b/c R1 was in her line of fire although still 10+ feet away. Blue called dead ball, ruled interference, and called BR out for the double play.

Bottom line, the runner is not required to slide, evade, etc, but she can not interfere, and if to avoid interfering she needs to do one of those things, so be it. Not doing anything except continuing on her way to 2B is OK too,as long as, she doesn't interfere with a defensive player's opportunity to make a play on another runner.