Skip to main content

I have a question from a fellow umpire;

Varsity baseball - Fed Rules; R1 & R2 double steal w/ less than two outs.

Right handed B1 takes pitch over the inside corner for a strike. F2 receives the ball, and then steps back and to his left to throw around B1 in an attempt to retire R1 at 3B. As F2 plants his foot, he steps on my left foot, stumbles as he throws to F5 covering the bag, and ends up on the ground. I never moved my feet as I hammered a strike. R1 is safe without much of a play and as F2 is sitting on the ground, he looks to the dugout for help saying, "I stepped on his foot."

Fed rules for interference say its umpire interference if the umpire "inadvertently moves so as to hinder a catcher's throw" (2.21.2). I never moved except to hammer the strike.

I looked in the federation casebook and there are no situations regarding an umpire who does not move, only a reference to an umpire who interferes with a throw.

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Originally Posted by POLOGREEN:

I have a question from a fellow umpire;

Varsity baseball - Fed Rules; R1 & R2 double steal w/ less than two outs.

Right handed B1 takes pitch over the inside corner for a strike. F2 receives the ball, and then steps back and to his left to throw around B1 in an attempt to retire R1 at 3B. As F2 plants his foot, he steps on my left foot, stumbles as he throws to F5 covering the bag, and ends up on the ground. I never moved my feet as I hammered a strike. R1 is safe without much of a play and as F2 is sitting on the ground, he looks to the dugout for help saying, "I stepped on his foot."

Fed rules for interference say its umpire interference if the umpire "inadvertently moves so as to hinder a catcher's throw" (2.21.2). I never moved except to hammer the strike.

I looked in the federation casebook and there are no situations regarding an umpire who does not move, only a reference to an umpire who interferes with a throw.


Isn't this the same as was posted on Umpire Empire?  Most (maybe all) said it's UI.  One association interpreter (or something like that) indicated it was not UI, because of the lack of movement you mentioned.   So, either a bunch of umpires are wrong, or an interpreter is wrong, or FED is different, or the rule in one association is different (and all of the above have happened before).

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×