Skip to main content

It's my understanding that interference occurs when a runner deliberately hinders the fielder from making a play. If this is the case, wasn't Matt Holliday's slide into Starlin Castro the very definition of interference? Tim McCarver tried to make it seem like Holliday was not interfering because he was "still able to reach out and touch second." But the baseline isn't even a factor in this situation, is it? A player could slide directly over the bag and still be called for interference as long as he was DELIBERATELY trying to hinder the fielder.

Am I wrong on this? If not, how the heck did the umpire miss this call?
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

@bigheat 27-42 Here is an excerpt from the official MLB rulebook:

"If, in the judgment of the umpire, a base runner willfully and deliberately interferes with a batted ball or a fielder in the act of fielding a batted ball with the obvious intent to break up a double play, the ball is dead. The umpire shall call the runner out for interference and also call out the batter-runner because of the action of his teammate. In no event may bases be run or runs scored because of such action by a runner."

This is exactly what Holliday did. He slid about three feet to the right of second base with the obvious intent of breaking up the double play (he kicked Castro in the shin and left a giant hole in his sock). He made no effort to touch second base, in fact, he didn't even begin his slide until he was almost even with it.

If that's not an interference call than what is?
Rule 6.05(m) covers this situation. Additionally the Major League Baseball Umpire Manual offers guidelines to assist the umpire in deciding if interference occurred.

The batter is out if:
(m) A preceding runner shall, in the umpire’s judgment, intentionally interfere with a fielder who is attempting to catch a thrown ball or to throw a ball in an attempt to complete any play:
Rule 6.05(m) Comment: The objective of this rule is to penalize the offensive team for deliberate, unwarranted, unsportsmanlike action by the runner in leaving the baseline for the obvious purpose of crashing the pivot man on a double play, rather than trying to reach the base. Obviously this is an umpire’s judgment play.


The MLBUM says: (in part; I'm not willing to type in everything)
In sliding to a base, the runner should be able to reach the base with his hand or foot.
....
Any definite change in direction by the runner to contact the fielder would be considered interference.
...

There's more concerning roll blocks, etc.
Last edited by 3FingeredGlove
IMHO, they are all big boys and i am one of the type of fans and players who likes a little bit of hard nosed baseball as long as it is not trying to hurt another person. If a player is crowding the plate, back him off. If there is a chance you can break up a double play without hurting the guy, go for it. The one thing that got close to anything being hurt besides what happened after the not double play was castro's sock was torn.

The whole idea is Holliday was trying to break up the double play and he succesfully did that while still being able to touch the base and he kept his cleats low. If it was a busch league slide, then that's a different story. It was not a Busch League slide though. The call could have gone either way but i Personally believe it was hard nosed but not dirty. and hard nosed is not grounds for interference.
I agree that it was called according to what is allowed at the MLB level. I personally believe they should tighten it up some. Because of TV replays they no longer give a neighborhood play, designed to protect infielders, so when you make no attempt at the base, you should get banged. If you actually touch the base and take him out, no problem. In this play he never even considered toouching the base, even though he was close enough to do so.

Add Reply

Post
.
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×