Great job by the third base coach. He asked what happened to be there for his team, but then accepted the call. He made sure it was a teaching moment for his player. Great job coach
@Michael Heathman He was telling the coach to instruct the player so the player would know what he did wrong, so he would maybe remember to not repeat his mistake. What's wrong with that? I hate it when a coach DOESN'T say anything. Then, the players never learn from their mistakes as they go forward playing baseball.
@@jtjvlj it’s not appropriate to yell across the diamond. Little League coaches in most cases have good intentions but they don’t know how to act on a ball diamond. Decorum and protocol are important. All coaches should be wearing uniforms. The bar is set very low for Little League
@@ussstink you are correct. They aren’t really baseball coaches in most cases. 90 % can not explain running lane interference. All coaches should be in uniform. Very little respect for the game.
Four umpires, two managers, two announcers, and not one of them knows the damn rule without getting on the phone to somebody. These are not some well-meaning parent volunteers. This is a regional elimination game with a four-man umpiring crew. There is no excuse for these guys not knowing the rules.
Runner's lane interference is an immediate dead ball. Batter's out and runners may not advance. So, it took some time, a meeting of the committee and a phone call but they got it right in the end.
@@oldschooldiy3240 What an irrelevant comment. I know the NFHS and the MLB book very well. After having umpired close to 4000 games I do not need to memorize a LL rule book. I'll kick your ass on any rules knowledge test at any level of baseball.
@@alanhess9306 right! That shouldn't have required a call however the offensive Coach may have protested the ruling in which case in little league tournament play they must call to the next level to get a ruling even if they know what the answer will be. I'm guessing that is what happened because you are right, this is pretty routine and simple to get right.
Unfortunately, the plate umpire had two jobs. First, he had to stay put to observe the runner scoring from 3rd. Second, he had to observe the runner/batter and 1st baseman in the event there is some sort of appeal to him. Difficult situation to be in, but they got it correct.
I like them letting it play out. He had the chance to confer with the other umpires to make sure it was the right call. That way, if for any reason your initial assumption was incorrect, you have allowed the play to continue with a known outcome.
Correct call. Immediately upon the interference it is a dead bal. All runners return to the previously touched base. No one scores, no one advances. Batter/runner is out for interference.
Right call. The batter/runner was in-between the throw and the 1B fielding the throw, making it harder for the 1B to field the throw. So that's interference, plain and simple. If he had been in the runner's lane (both feet inside), he would have been protected from the interference call, but he wasn't. Rule 6.05(j). Note: The commenters in the broadcast are morons. The batter is absolutely allowed to run inside the foul line, "in the field of play," he just isn't protected from an interference call if he does. Ultimately, the batter was lucky he didn't get drilled in back. Then you get both an interference call and a painful lesson.
@@jfgm2202 by rule, it's when the ball "reaches the batter"; as the batter would normally hit the ball out in front of the plate, I generally interpret it as when the ball is over the dirt in front of home plate; the ball is covering that space pretty quick, it's tough to call it any more tightly than that
it wouldn't matter on this play however: since there was interference by the batter runner, all runners return to the base occupied at time of pitch. that said, I sure would like to have seen U1 and U2 at least reaching into their pockets for their red flags. without the RLI though, R2 would've been put back on 2B.
The LL rule reads that if you are on the line you are in the box the first part of the lane he was outside the last part he was in, bottom line if he wasn't in all the way he was outside the lane. RIGHT CALL!
No. Incorrect call. The catcher's throw to 1st was not hindered by the runner. The HP umpire bailed out the catcher for a bad throw that was outside of 1st.
The call was correct. But the umpires should have known that on any interference, the ball is dead and bases can't be run. The exasperating part of watching this was the time it took to finally place the runners correctly.
yeah, there is an exception to this rule, the runner is allowed to run outside the lane to avoid a player fielding the ball, which in this case was a bunt, if he ran to the right he would have been called for interference with the catcher picking up the ball which is why he ran to the left which is allowed, he is then allowed to run to the base....note in MOST interference calls the runner must either collide with the fielder or the ball has to hit him...neither happened here so it really comes down to the umps decisions, which is what makes these type of calls bullshit as the exception allowed him to run to avoid the fielded play at the plate.
R2 might have been on third at the time of the interference. R1 was 1 step shy of second, but R2 was running faster than R1. The rule states that runners are returned to the base they last legally touched at the time of the interference, not at the time of the pitch or at the time of the batted ball.
@@FactsMatter LL Rules: "Offensive interference is an act by a member of the team at bat which interferes with, obstructs, impedes, hinder or confuses any fielder attempting to make a play. If the umpire declares the batter, batter-runner or a runner out for interference, _all other runners shall return to the last base that was, in the judgment of the umpire, legally touched _*_at the time of the interference_*_ ,_ unless otherwise provided by these rules."
@@MaydayAggro If that is the case the interference happened well before the runner was even on 3rd base. If you pause the footage around the 1:08 mark the runner from second is about halfway to third when the interference would have occurred. Otherwise, I agree with the assessment you made. Man, I miss playing and umpiring. but being one-legged makes the game hard to do on either front lol.
@@dragula131 how could there be interference at 1:08 when there's not even a throw yet? By the time we get a throw at 1:10, R2 is already out of frame.
yeah, there is an exception to this rule, the runner is allowed to run outside the lane to avoid a player fielding the ball, which in this case was a bunt, if he ran to the right he would have been called for interference with the catcher picking up the ball which is why he ran to the left which is allowed, he is then allowed to run to the base....note in MOST interference calls the runner must either collide with the fielder or the ball has to hit him...neither happened here so it really comes down to the umps decisions, which is what makes these type of calls bullshit as the exception allowed him to run to avoid the fielded play at the plate.
@@jamesw71 You are consistently wrong. No where does the rule book say that if he leaves the lane he can run straight to the base. What the rule does say is that the runner is required to be in the lane in order to be protected from interference. He was out of the lane and interfered with the fielder taking the throw at first base. RLI is 100% the correct call.
@dnnyshdy Thanks for the compliment but nobody is perfect. Having a catcher throw to the inside of the base is the proper technique. It keeps the runner and the ball away from each other and is much safer for the first baseman. In response to your off topic comment about pitchers. There still would be walks because pitchers throw balls on purpose to some batters.
For all the people that are saying that it is a simple error on 1st baseman and no interference did it occur to you that the reason he dropped it was because he was having trouble seeing the ball because the runner was where he was not supposed to be and in his way?
Exactly.....but keep in mind that those who don't see it that way are the ones who never read a rulebook and ALWAYS have to have the calls go their way!!
This year's LLWS ups are really giving the pitchers that outside strike. Batters better come hit Geaux Texas Needville Texas is a very small town, what an achievement.
Sure, but needing to avoid the ball doesn't give him an exception to having to get into the runner's lane halfway to the base. He only would get an exception if he had to run around a fielder.
Correct call, but the throw from the catcher, unless on purpose, should have been further into fair territory with the 1st baseman more properly set up.
True, but he did not interfere with the throw. Catcher made a good throw which the 1B saw all the way and simply dropped. Interference should not have been called.
@@lukek5303 Running outside the baseline is not an automatic out. Running outside the baseline causing interference or to avoid a tag is an automatic out.
Doesn’t really matter as long as they get the call right. Plus I like to let things play out to see if I actually need to call anything. Most of the time I dont
@@jackjon7763 Except you would expect a competent group of umpires to make the call immediately, call time and place the runners. These guys seemed overly confused about what to do. When interference occurs, you make the call and kill the play immediately. You do not wait to see how things play out to make the call.
Last base touched, the runner from 1st touched 2nd before intfr, br is out and runners stay at 2nd and third, rule say last base "touched", not occupied or original base. wording is important here
hard to tell, but it APPEARS as though (at 0:07) that the batter/runner's right foot touches the baseline on his last step toward first base. IF that were the case, then that is sufficient compliance for the runner's lane interference requirement ("...either foot touching or inside the baseline..."). also at 0:07, i REALLY would have liked to see the plate umpire get farther down the first baseline, especially since the catcher is so far in front of home plate fielding the bunt and there will be no immediate play at the plate. if the plate umpire gets down the baseline, this would allow him better visibility of the play and he could immediately make (and just as importantly, SELL) the RLI violation, if in fact it occurs. yes, kudos to the crew for "huddling" and getting the call "right"; but a confident, well-placed plate umpire would have looked a whole lot better.
If I understand you correctly, youre saying that because the Batter-Runners foot appeared to be on the runners lane line on his last step? The call is made when the catcher releases the ball, which clearly BOTH feet are to the left and outside of the runners-lane lines, which makes it clear Runners Lane Interference.
LL baseball diamonds dimensions are very tight and it's easy to get crowded on some plays (batter actually ran to field side of bunted ball)... But it was a correct call as he NEVER got back to the runners lane and definitely changed the play...
@@63076topher There is no requirement to run in the running lane. There is only protection IF the batter runner interferes with the catch while in the running lane.
please show me where in the interference rule it states the runner must immediately get back into the lane after they have ran out to avoid causing interference with the fielded play by the catcher at the plate? It doesn't, and in fact it says he is allowed to leave again to get to the bag, nothing in the interference or lane rules state after he has legally left the lane that he must then immediately return, it states he must maintain a straight line to the bag which he did...he was clearly safe by those who actually know that the exception to the interference rule means. this was a horrible call, mostly because it was called right the first time and they decided to review it and got it horribly wrong because they didn't know the rules.
@@JPINFV agreed and it is usually only called if the ball hits the runner or the runner hits the fielder attempting to field or catch the ball, neither happened in this case, and the exception to the rule actually says the runner can leave the lane to avoid the fielder/ball and lane rules state he must only then make a straight line to the base, nothing says he must immediately return to the running lane
@@jamesw71 The runner never (at any point) was to the right of baseline and for most of the baseline was WELL to the left of the line. You might notice there is a running lane actually marked where the runner must get to the right side of the baseline or risk interference. I assume you know this because your such a knowledgeable baseball guy... Or so you say!
Why does LL implement these dumb rules? If you draw a straight line from the RH batters box to first base its in the field of play all the way down. The batter doesnt deviate from that line except to avoid contact with the ball. This penalizes RH batters because the field is small and the batters boxes extend way too far into the field of play
This isn't just little league. Mlb has the same rule. And that's also why the runner doesn't have to be in a lane until the last half of the baseline. He has plenty of time to get there and three white lines to tell him where he needs to be.
well to be true there is an exception to the interference rule which allows the runner to run outside the lane to avoid a fielded ball, like happened here, the officials got the call wrong all the way because of this, plus if the runner was in the lane the ball would have hit him because the catcher made a bad throw and the ball was thrown into foul territory side of the 1st base bag which is why the fielder missed it.
Part of the running lane rule specifies that for interference to occur, the throw must be a proper throw, meaning that it must be a catchable throw. Running lane violation centers around the runner affecting the ability of F3 to receive the throw after failing to protect himself from interference through establishing his base path in the running lane. Here, while the runner never established a proper base path, the throw was also very close to not being catchable because it was wide. However, this is a good call because the presence of the runner did affect the ability of F3 to move and cleanly catch the ball.
This is only in OBR that the throw has to be a “proper throw”. For NFHS it doesn’t. This was part of a local rules meeting I just watched for umpiring in the state of Ohio. As for LL rules I would imagine it is the same, but not entirely sure!!
I would argue that because the catcher throws the ball into the runners lane then it’s an error. Even if the runner is on the outside line he is still in the way because of the catchers throw across the baseline to the outside corner of the bag. Proper throw is to inside corner of bag
@@charlesbarber5157 it does not have to be a proper throw according to NFHS rules. Not sure about LL rules. Also it’s a pretty good throw and the runner is not even close to the runners lane, he is 3-4 feet inside the first baseline. They got it right
@@charlesbarber5157 call foul? Your English is a little difficult to follow man. It’s interference, not sure why you think after review they wouldn’t get it right!
I think the batter tried to avoid the ball in play but by doing so, he did run out of the baseline and therefore interfered. Good call but I don't think the batter did it intentionally.
@@63076topher yeah, there is an exception to this rule, the runner is allowed to run outside the lane to avoid a player fielding the ball, which in this case was a bunt, if he ran to the right he would have been called for interference with the catcher picking up the ball which is why he ran to the left which is allowed, he is then allowed to run to the base....note in MOST interference calls the runner must either collide with the fielder or the ball has to hit him...neither happened here so it really comes down to the umps decisions, which is what makes these type of calls bullshit as the exception allowed him to run to avoid the fielded play at the plate.
I won't bother posting my umpire resume or how many games I've umpired. There are two questions an umpire has to ask him/herself in this situation. One was the runner outside the lane. If so did the runner effect the ability of the fielder to make the play. If you get yes to both you have an out for interference. This crew was a little odd in all the conferencing it took to get to their call...
In this case, however, the answer to both questions was "no". The batter-runner is allowed to run outside the running lane. If he does so, and prevents the first baseman from making a play on the ball it is interference. Here, however, a)the runner is in the baseline by the time the ball arrives at first base, and b) the catcher actually makes a good throw, but the first baseman simply dropped it. In my opinion, given my experience as an umpire at the 13-16 year old level, this was a bad call by the plate umpire.
@@direcorbie that's not how we interprete that play. The runner will inevitably be at or close to the lane. But if he past the 45 foot mark, I guess in case it's 30 Foot, you need to bang him on runner lane if he affects a throw. Yes this is a judgment call, but if a rater sees you rule this as not interference than he going to rate you down
Well stick with your call. I don't see how the ball going over the runner out of the lane is not effecting the play. Remember contact is not required to call interference
Corby Gilmore I agree. The ball hits the web of the first baseman’s glove, that is a good throw and on target it’s an E-3. I’m not an umpire but I do coach and know the rules of baseball.
So the runner tries to avoid running over or into the bunted ball, gets back into the running lane. Baseball rules are f$&ked up. No wonder there are out of control little league parents even if they understand most of the rules. Like they sometimes say in the NFL, let’s relax and let them play! Calls are supposed to be objective, right. We all know better. Look at the superimposed strike zone rectangle on tv in MLB, and how often home plate umps get it wrong! Keep the umps, so they can call balks, etc., close calls, et al, but as in the NFL, use replay technology. Becoming more and more technologically feasible in college, HS, and little league, obviously because we have this video, albeit not instantly reviewable by the umps. Unless in an ELITE little league and/or travel league program, most of us as kids who loved to play the game are taught the basics and even advanced nuances, depending on our coaches’ and our parents’ knowledge of the rules of the game. Purists may say things like tough, learn the game. Maybe so, but sometimes when I watch these obscure anomalies of rules, I wonder if we are taking the fun away from kids? Worse yet, discouraging participation. Yet, rules are rules. Sometimes I think umps are secretly giddy just waiting to spring an obscure rule interpretation showing their “mastery” of the rule book to make a call one way or another in the thinnest and narrowest “interpretation!” Good for them and their egos, but unfortunately sometimes the bring upon themselves the wrath of “little league parents.”
Who are you to question the rules of baseball? You are also ignorant. The official rule has nothing to do with the catcher’s throw. Running lane interference occurs when a batter/ runner impedes, hinders, or confuses a fielder at first base fielding a throw. When you run out of the running lane all the way to first base and only get in the lane to touch first base you forfeit your last stride protection into first base. It’s an obvious interference call. Doesn’t matter at all that the batter/ runner may have been avoided his hunted ball; that’s on him. What matters is did the batter/ runner interfere with the fielder attempting to glove a throw.
He never got in the lane he was on the grass then moved over but was still to the left of the line, runners lane or line was to the right where he was runnning.
This is definitely interference but it was a horrible job by the plate umpire. That needs to be called right away by the plate umpire and only by the plate umpire. The conference was totally unnecessary and horrible. It was the right call at the end of the day but it was done incredibly bad. Just think if the kid sliding into 3rd base breaks his leg on a play that should have immediately been called dead and interference called and runners returned.
you are not familiar with the exceptions to the interference rule then...the batter is allowed to run out of the lane to avoid a fielded play, and nothing in the rule states he must then immediately return to the lane, in fact it says he can leave it again to get to the base.....plain and simple in the interference rule.
MLB rule is different. The runner establishes the base path. As long as he maintains the same path, it's not interference. Not sure of the little league rule. But it seems to me that once the batter establishes his path to the bag, as long as he maintains that path, it shouldn't be interference. I saw an MLB play where the runner ran 3 feet inside the line the whole way and the throw went off his back. Play was reviewed and result was no call, runner safe.
Incorrect. OBR 5.09(a)(11): 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 judgement in doing so interferes with the fielder taking the throw at first base.
So this is little league rules that are much different than major league! Runners on 1st and 2nd , no outs,. bunt happens runner at first called out for interference , runners are forced to advance.. so,,, runners that were forced don't go back to original base! It should be, runners at 2nd and 3rd 1out ! It's double punishment to the offense , there is no such thing as double punishment for for defense or offense!!!
Bad ruling IMO at this level.. ,, the batter is already positioned inside the line..by his position in the RH batters box..IMO this should have been a judgement call as to whether he intentionally blocked the play..especially at this level.. he ran from his legal spot in the batters box to the foul line..three to four steps before the bag he was on the line...Much much different expectations should be applied to RH hitters vs left..
@@BUSTER.BRATAMUS at this level the rules are much more defined than in the majors. Intent does not matter, nor is there an assumption of a good throw by the fielder. It is the batter/runner's job to get into the running lane whether they are right or left-handed.
agreed, the runner would have been out anyway, the author stated in his text the runner beat the throw to first but he is wrong, he wasn't even close to beating the throw, pretty much because he had to run out of the baseline to avoid the play with the catcher picking up and throwing the ball, which he is allowed to do under the rules....umps got this one wrong, also the play at 3rd was too close to call, he looked safe as well but was called out on the tag, but the tag can't be seen so we have to trust the umps decision....again.
@@jamesw71 The umps were correct. Yes, the runner must avoid the fielder but he must get back in the lane or he is subject to being called out for the interference.
Horrible umpiring. Plate up never rules on fair/foul, makes no call regarding interference, then decides after the play to (correctly) call interference even though he didn’t actually see it nor call it. Disaster.
mbcorc1 where are you getting that the batter beat the throw to first? He would have been out by a mile...not sure I would have called that interference though, he was back in the lane after having to first dodge the ball after he bunted it so he didn't interfere with the catch making the play picking it up. The problem here is the catchers throw to first base was inside the lane!!! The runner was on the line and would have interfered even if he was well inside the lane because of how bad the throw was. That was the reason the 1st baseman didn't catch it, catcher should have thrown it to the left of the runner instead of to the right, would have made the play at first much easier and possible double play attempt at 3rd base. Even the call at 3rd was pretty bad, he looked safe to me, but was a bad angle so hard to tell when the tag was made, if it was made.
Why did it take a 4 umpire conference to make this call? This call is Umpiring 101. It is made by plate umpire at all times and should be immediate and emphatic. The ball is dead immediately, batter-runner is out, all other runners return to the base the held at the time of the pitch.
@@rayray4192 Even in the 2-man system the plate umpire would never enter fair ground on this play. His first responsibility is fair\foul on this play. He needs to take a step to his left in foul ground to look down the line and indicate fair\foul. His second responsibility is interference by the BR. His third job is to watch for a pulled foot by the 1st baseman. This PU did none of those things correctly because he moved up the first base line in foul ground. He was also out of position to make a call on the runner who came home at :10. I worked over 3,000 ball games as an amateur umpire in both baseball and fastpitch softball. My association made it a point to use correct mechanics and to keep up with changes. We had exactly one LL contract and we universally hated to work that league. Not a single one of us used the mechanics put out by Little League. We used ASA fastpitch mechanics in that league because fastpitch mechanics call for the umpires to work outside the baselines, just like LL mechanics, until the ball went into the outfield. All of our other baseball contracts were with PONY league organizations where even the 12 year olds were leading off, stealing, and using the set position. We always worked inside on those games.
Same happen to my son in the state tournament lastyear! The tieing run scored but was put back on third! The diff was that my son HAD to step on the foul line to get around the first baseman that came up for bunt but was called off by the catcher! Was the bottom of last inning and he was the second out and next kid struck out eliminating us from the tournament)
Fielder has the right to field the ball the runner must avoid the person fielding the ball. If the catcher call the first baseman and he is closer to the field the ball then if runner has to avoid the first baseman then it's obstruction
@@tracyyeary5970 1 fielder has the right to the ball. So if F2 fielded the ball, F3 doesn't have protection and should stay out of the way of the batter running attempting to reach 1st. It sounds like F3 obstructed the BR's path to 1st and if it would have been a close play (reasonable possibility that BR would have been safe if not for the obstruction), should have been awarded protection to 1st base (type B obstruction).
It shouldn't have taken them that long to send the runners back to their original places on the bases & since these 4 umpires were good enough to be selected for regional's then they should have know what to do & not consult with who ever was on the radio talking to the plate umpire. Terrible job by the umpiring crew & I am a former umpire & coach
remember how every year they make a big deal about the fact that the LL umpires are "volunteers". well, when it comes to umpires, you get what you pay for. until LL pays umpires, this will happen every year. i can't even watch the LLWS any more. strike zone much??
@@cloudwatcher724 I know of a LL Umpire's Association that was actually paid to officiate LL Games starting with the 11 12 yr olds bracket all the way up to junior league 13 & 14 yr olds & Senior league 14 & 15 yr olds. Not all LL Umpires are your typical volunteer. As for the LL World Series Umpires give the 11 & 12 Yr olds a little bigger strikeout zone & for the most part the games are officiated quite well & each of the Umpires have to earn the right to make it to Williamsport or any other location that holds World Series games. I stand by my original comment that the Umpire who earned the right to officiate Regional Tournaments should not have taken that long to send the runners back.
I’ve never liked these calls……for one, he was barely inside the baseline chalk. Two, there is no “safety bag” at first occupying the designated runners lane. The catcher made a poor throw and the first baseman shoulda caught it, it then gets put on the runner and he is deemed at fault. It’s a very subjective rule and one I don’t really like…..if there was an orange bag to touch it’s much easier for the runner. But if they call interference then it’s a dead ball, runners return…..
@@dukebuck Well no, it is not a made up rule. For the batter-runner, contact with the thrown ball does not have to be made. There are numerous links to this, but this might be a good start: baseball-rules.com/FAQs.htm#RUNL
It looked like the batter tried to avoid the ball but she was back on the track before the catcher threw the ball. Don't think the catcher would have had a good line of sight anyway
The whole way down, the batter-runner was running illegally. He has to be running in the runner's lane (between the foul line and the white line to the right of it) or he could be called for interference.
You can't be serious. The runner was never in the lane. Either there is something seriously wrong with your eyes or you don't know how the running lane works.
Let me first say that I may very well be wrong lol. I have always been taught that if the ball didn’t hit the runner, it’s not a lane violation. Of course, it’s travel softball, but we use high school federation rules. Just as you can’t call interference or obstruction without contact, it’s always been contact that causes the call to be made. As I said, I may be wrong. I’ll have to dig out my book and do some research. Thoughts?
The person(s) who taught you never read the definitions section of the rule book. Specifically, they did not read the definition of interference. "The act of an offensive player or team member, umpire or spectator that impedes, hinders, or confuses a defensive player attempting to execute a play. Contact is not necessary."
Quick Question (and nothing to do with Batter/Runner Interference), if you stop the video at 4:07 you will see the runner on Second and First leave before the ball arrives to the batter. Is this a case of the runner leaving early? This is for my Umpire Knowledge. If this is the case how would the Umpires rule that. No play and runners return back to their previous occupied base and the Hitter returns to the box. Thank you for your help.
No, the runners are allowed to leave when the ball leaves the pitcher's hand! Up till then they are required to stay "on the bag"! They were sent back to the original bases to prevent the "interfering" team from gaining any advantage from the runner's interference! Hope this cleared it up!
@@oldschooldiy3240 Rule 7.13: When a pitcher is contacting the pitcher’s plate and in possession of the ball, and the catcher is in the catcher’s box ready to receive delivery of the ball, baserunners shall not leave their bases until the ball has been delivered and reached the batter. Sorry but in majors and below its crossing the plate. This is LL, not travel or Pony
Yes you are correct. In LL Major and below, they cannot leave until the all reaches the plate. They missed it Rule 7.13: When a pitcher is contacting the pitcher’s plate and in possession of the ball, and the catcher is in the catcher’s box ready to receive delivery of the ball, baserunners shall not leave their bases until the ball has been delivered and reached the batter.
none of the replies seem to completely answer your question, so I'll add my answer. First, mechanics: the umpire (U2 in this case) should drop a red flag when the runner leaves early, but should make no other signal or verbal. In the actual play in the video, RLI supersedes R2 leaving early, so even if it had been called it wouldn't have mattered. Let us assume however that there was no RLI. In this instance, regardless of whether BR was safe or out at first, but all other action proceeded the same as in the video, then U2 would call time at the end of all playing action; R2 would be returned to 2B, the run taken off the board, and the out on R1 at 3B would stand. The reason it doesn't matter whether BR is safe or out at first is that only R1 can be returned to 1B, but R1 is out at 3B and the out stands. R2 can only be returned as far back as the originally occupied base, 2B. If R1 had been safe at 3B, then it would matter whether BR was out or not - R1 would be returned to 1B, but if BR is on 1B then R1 is forced to 2B; likewise, R2 would be returned to 2B, but if 2B is occupied then he is forced to 3B. But again, in this actual play, RLI supersedes the rest. As soon as RLI occurs, even if called after the play is over, the ball is immediately dead, the BR is out, and all runners return to their original bases.
Some leagues that cannot leave the base until the ball crosses the plate. It's a dead ball and runner is out. But can call only one runner out. Have bases loaded and all three leave early only one runner can be called out. Most likely it would be the runner at third.
It is interference by rule but announcer saying he had no lane to throw it was incorrect. Catcher should have taken his setup step further in the field of play and not throw to the outside of the bag. Catcher played that very badly or was never coached on how to throw down to first.
Correct. By the time the catcher made the throw, the runner was fully in the running lane (dirt). The catcher threw it to the far side of the bag. Had the runner been in the base path the whole time, it still would have been a terrible throw and likely would have been missed. When the runner was in the grass, the catcher hadn't even secured the ball. It may be interference by rule, but the runner didn't interfere with the throw. The throw was just off-target, and the 1B didn't establish a throwing lane for his catcher.
@@rayray4192 the announcers initially said the runners are allowed to advance 60 feet. All these umpires are unqualified if they have to huddle and discuss where to place the runners. Very bad.
@@alanhess9306 The players deserve better. It’s sad that Little League refuses to hire qualified umpires. They are in love with their volunteer system. The volunteer system is a miserable failure. Every year I sit down with a beer and guacamole and salsa and chips to watch the Little League World Series and every year I’m disappointed in the Little League decision to not hire local umpires to work their tournament. I was in Williamsport 6 months ago- beautiful river town with rolling forested hills. Why not hire Williamsport high school umpires to work the games? You and I would have immediately made a dynamic call of time out and interference and then immediately pointed runners back to their time of pitch base. I would direct R-1 back to first base and then R-2 back to second base. The antithesis of how we award runners bases to advance. This pathetic display of umpiring is so bad it’s disgusting. Did the umpire crew not know the rule for for runner placement, or did they not know where the runners were at the time of the pitch? Perhaps both. Hope you are well and happy and enjoying the World Series. The umpires have been outstanding. I don’t care who wins so I’m rooting for the umpires.
actually it's a 6 man crew. It's the little league world series, not regular season; even at district level, we use 4 man crews for all quarter-final and higher games, and certainly always 4 man for section and state games
Here's one thing: look at how the catcher forces the batter to avoid him with his move from behind the plate. I think honestly, a case could be made that the catcher initially obstructed the running path of the batter. The ruling was handled well by all involved, and sportsmanship was respected.
Bad throw on catcher an first needs to learn how to squeeze his glove. When a runner rounds 3rd an steps on grass there not out. Lol at all the little league pro umpires in the comments.
He was never "in the runner's lane"! It's not what hit him, it's the catcher could not make a clean throw to first because of where the batter was running! He was not between the two chalk lines, as required!
As an umpire of 35 years, mostly NCAA, including post season, I'll give my opinion on what you have here: an error on the first baseman, that's it. I've got no infraction by the batter-runner. I'm disturbed by how many are posting here who have little to no understanding of the rules of the game, which I taught in a clinic for 14 years. In baseball, you don't have anything until it happens. First off, the aforementioned "runner's lane" is only the last few feet before first base. On a regulation field, it's 45 feet long from first base. In this runner's lane the batter-runner is protected from being called for interference (unless he physically prevents a defensive player from tagging him, like slapping the defensive player's glove, etc.). A batter-runner is considered "Inside" the runner's lane if his feet hit the ground within it - and that would include the chalk lines. Now, here's the most important thing to remember: the only moment that is relevant to judging whether or not the batter-runner might have committed interference is at the precise moment a play or attempt play is being made. If no play is being made, then you've got nothing. On this particular play, the "only" moment that comes into scrutiny is when the thrown ball (from the catcher) is passing at or near the batter-runner. Based on the slow replay, it is clear when the ball is passing near/over the left shoulder of the batter-runner, you can see at that precise moment the batter-runner's feet (over two steps) come down on the foul line beyond the starting point of the runner's lane. The foul line is "inside" and part of the runner's lane. Then the ball passes the batter-runner and is missed by the first baseman prior to the batter-runner reaching the base. To make it easier to understand, let's say the thrown ball from the catcher would have hit the batter-runner on his shoulder or in his back. The only thing that matters is the exact position or spot the batter-runner is in. If he's in the runner's lane (as shown with his feet coming down on the foul line) then the batter-runner is protected from being charged with interference. Folks, the bottom line here is all you've got is the first baseman missing the ball. That's why you'll often hear when a catcher complains the batter-runner was out of the runner's lane, his coach will say "next time drill him in his back or the back of the head." And for anyone who's thinking ahead on this, do not compare this situation to batter's interference on a catcher on an attempted steal throw down. Two different situations. I'm sorry, but especially in a college game, if an umpire calls this, he's going to have to explain to the conference chief.
It's great to know the rules, which you do (except you are wrong about the running lane being only the last few feet. It's the last half of the distance between home and first, and is clearly marked on this field), but you still have to see the play correctly in order to apply them properly. In this video, at no time did the batter/baserunner EVER take a step that was entirely inside the running lane. He was outside the running lane, and in fair territory, his entire trip to first, and ended up interfering with the fielder being able to take the throw. Every step he took, he had at least part of his foot in fair territory. If his foot is half on the foul line and half in fair territory, he is OUT of the running lane.
@@JohnDoe-bz3ci the "protected" running lane for the batter-runner is the last half of the distance from home to first. How am I wrong on that? But I do agree with you that we're looking at a video and wasn't there to see the play live from the field - and in fairness to the umpires on the field, they made a different call but was overturned by the booth, is that not correct? I'm just saying if you're an umpire in the minors and you make this ruling, I don't think you'll ever see a major league stadium.
@@guyfroml You said the runner's lane is "only the last few feet before first base". It's the last half of the base line, not just the last few feet. At first the umps called the batter/runner safe at first, but after conversing, they called him out, which was the right call, because the runner was clearly running in the field of play the entire trip to first. It wasn't even close. He was clearly running in the field of play the whole time, and I'm surprised you couldn't see that at regular speed. They did not get overturned by the booth. They should have made the call immediately, though, without having to talk to each other. Unfortunately, apparently none of them knew where to place the baserunners after the play was over, and had to go to the booth to get instructions on that. As an assigner of umpires for 20 years, I would be glad that they got everything right in the end, but upset because they didn't make the interference call immediately, and out of 4 umps, none of them knew where to put the runners.
@@JohnDoe-bz3ci When I referred to "last few feet" I was being ambiguous to do my not knowing what the distance would be on a little league field. I only worked high school, college and pro ball. I only know for certain what the distance/length is on those levels. And "clearly" (by my experience) is a subjective term.
Plate umpire was watching the play but failed to call batters interference, this is a text book interference call. I'm not sure how this umpire got selected to do a regional game. There are many umpires who have been umpiring for over 20 years and are great at what they do but never get the call to do a regional game. The selective process needs to be improved to weed out umpires who miss simple calls like this one
@@csxfloridafunnelrailfan3065 It's the plate umpires responsibility to watch the running lane and call interference why do you think he asked for help.
You're right. The call being up the baseline, he could have called it too. I've just always seen it called by the 1B umpire. So I suppose it actually could have been either umpire's call. But since it wasn't called during the play, the UIC had to discuss it with his base umpires. It would actually be improper protocol for him to make the call after the play without doing that.
He is not out for simply running on the wrong side all the foul line. He has to interfere with a throw in the umpires judgement. Which he did. If the catcher didn't throw to first that runner would have been safe.
My grandsons are very good players, but won't play because they told me the umpires screws up the game. I don't watch pro sports for the same reasons. Pro foot ball that is not worth watching anymore
If you like all the rules some good some stupid. Your welcome to watch, I play in the 70's and I guess every thing change. I simple don't like to watch it anymore, and I'm happy my grand kids don't care to play.
Every grand kids are" very good players," even when they suck. Im sure thats not the reason there not playing. You shouldnt give up on a game your supposed to love just because the umps make a few bad calls. Its not all about winning, the umps dont screw it up that bad. Im mean hell there only human, but i guess nobody can be as perfect as your sweet lil grandkids
Ball is dead immediately and the Batter/runner is out and all other base runners return to the base they occupied at the pitch! How basic and common is this rule?! WHY ALL THE CONFUSION!!!! UMPIRE INCOMPETENCE - ALL OF THEM!!!!!!!!!
This is the wrong call, yes she was out because she was out of the baseline but there was no interviewence, the ball never touched the baseruner, what?
If the runner is out of the lane and hinders the fielder's ability to catch the throw, we have interference. The throw does not need to hit the runner for interference to be called.
@@coreyhill681 As I said, by rule, the ball does not need to touch the runner for interference to be called.. Any hindrance of the fielder when the runner is out of the lane is interference
Alan: Some do - some don't. After playing two years of minor league baseball, I went to law school. That runner was moving to his left to try and avoid contact. He did not intentionally try to bowl him over and should not have been thrown out of the game.
@@Rich-xb3xk Rich, It appears you are not commenting on the correct video. In this video, the batter-runner was out of the running lane the entire way to first base. He interfered with the fielder taking the throw. This is textbook running lane interference. Good call. There was no one bowled over and there was no one thrown out of the game.
Alan: Then we are talking about tow different videos. The video to which I replied had the runner tossed out of the game. The base line is 3 feet either side of the line. You do not have to run on the line. If he was more than 3 feet off the line, the ump would have needed a tape measurer.
@@Rich-xb3xk am I missing something? I don't see the ejection nor anyone being bowled over. The runner, in this video, must be in the running lane. It was not a situation where he was out of his basepath, he was out of the running lane which prevented the fielder from fielding the throw.
ok so lets observe this , due to where the batter was running the catcher should have made a throw away from 1st more towards 2nd , if so we aren't having this conversation...
How about the runner having both feet in the running lane like he should have? If he ran where he should have, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
This should have been a dead ball call anyway, as in slowing the video both base runners clearly left the bases before the ball got to home plate, and should both have been called out. It happens between 4:06 and 4:07 seconds. It doesn't even look like the ball hadn't quite left the green and onto the dirt at home plate before they left their bases. In LL, the players may not leave their bases until the ball reaches the plate.** ** Edited thanks to Wolf Pack Judo. While I did say it correctly in the beginning of my comment, at the end of it, I originally said the base runners couldn't leave their bases until the ball crosses the plate. The rule is they cannot leave until it REACHES the plate.
Or maybe the fielding team teaches their catchers and first baseman fundamental badeball. Using communication to plan either a inside or outside throw depending on where the runner is. Thats not interference. 3 feet both sides of the chalk.
@@RHammer1983 Yes, the catcher should have yelled inside or outside, however the batter was very clearly well within the grass and I would have made the same call the umpires did there. It looks like he was well outside of the allowed running lane. Either way, they could have called everyone out (if there were no outs), as both runners left the bases early and the batter interfered with the throw to first base. I actually do agree with you the catcher should have called inside for the throw to the first baseman, but I'm thinking he popped up possibly with the thought of throwing to another base player to try to get more than one out on a forced double play.
2200 baseball games umpired for me. 1000 of those are travel ages 12-14. Thats how your taught to run to first. 3 feet each way is the rule. Great bunt by that kid and he has to avoid making contact with the catcher.
@@RHammer1983 I'm not arguing the rule, and I completely agree the catcher should have called inside or outside, but as I said, it kind of looked like he was contemplating a throw to third base before he went to first. Regardless, both of the base runners should have been called out for leaving the bases before the ball arrived at the plate. I concede to the argument regarding the batter, and I agree it was a great bunt. I'm focusing on the base runners, not the batter. Whether the batter interfered with the throw to first is questionable, but there is no doubt the base runners left early, and should have been called out.
The main issue is you have 12 year olds who are good enough to beat varsity high school teams, are forced to little league rules like short base paths. They should be leading off and have more feet for a catcher to make a play on a bunt.
Why are you advancing Runners when it's a dead ball. The runner was not in the running Lane that did not cause or has no bearing on that guy catching the ball to dead ball nobody advances everybody stays where they're at. Wayne on here got it right way to go guy you must be a good umpire
Great job by the third base coach. He asked what happened to be there for his team, but then accepted the call. He made sure it was a teaching moment for his player. Great job coach
@Michael Heathman He was telling the coach to instruct the player so the player would know what he did wrong, so he would maybe remember to not repeat his mistake. What's wrong with that? I hate it when a coach DOESN'T say anything. Then, the players never learn from their mistakes as they go forward playing baseball.
@Michael Heathman Apparently not your coach....You cannot even comprehend my comment evidently.
So.....playing in the LLWS and kid still needs to be told about the baselines? Coaches have not done their jobs.
@@jtjvlj it’s not appropriate to yell across the diamond. Little League coaches in most cases have good intentions but they don’t know how to act on a ball diamond. Decorum and protocol are important. All coaches should be wearing uniforms. The bar is set very low for Little League
@@ussstink you are correct. They aren’t really baseball coaches in most cases. 90 % can not explain running lane interference. All coaches should be in uniform. Very little respect for the game.
Announcers were all over the place. First said the runners should go back. Then said they should advance one base.
YES took awhile but FINALLY got call right !! BR is out der interference & no runners can advance for offensive infraction
Four umpires, two managers, two announcers, and not one of them knows the damn rule without getting on the phone to somebody. These are not some well-meaning parent volunteers. This is a regional elimination game with a four-man umpiring crew. There is no excuse for these guys not knowing the rules.
It was an incorrect call since the runner did not hinder the throw or catch of the ball.
Runner's lane interference is an immediate dead ball. Batter's out and runners may not advance. So, it took some time, a meeting of the committee and a phone call but they got it right in the end.
This is somewhat ridiculous that the umpires didn't immediately know what to do.
@@alanhess9306 Get a little league rule book and memorize the whole thing! After that apply for membership in "M.E.N.S.A."!!
@@oldschooldiy3240 What an irrelevant comment. I know the NFHS and the MLB book very well. After having umpired close to 4000 games I do not need to memorize a LL rule book. I'll kick your ass on any rules knowledge test at any level of baseball.
Great call and first class by meeting together and getting it right
@@alanhess9306 right! That shouldn't have required a call however the offensive Coach may have protested the ruling in which case in little league tournament play they must call to the next level to get a ruling even if they know what the answer will be. I'm guessing that is what happened because you are right, this is pretty routine and simple to get right.
The plate umpire should have called dead ball right away and called batter runner out and runners have go back and not able to advance
Unfortunately, the plate umpire had two jobs. First, he had to stay put to observe the runner scoring from 3rd. Second, he had to observe the runner/batter and 1st baseman in the event there is some sort of appeal to him. Difficult situation to be in, but they got it correct.
I agree.
Tracy Yeary :You got it!
I like them letting it play out. He had the chance to confer with the other umpires to make sure it was the right call. That way, if for any reason your initial assumption was incorrect, you have allowed the play to continue with a known outcome.
@@andrewmcnicoll4268 I understand your point but when such an obvious interference like this occurs, you need to kill the play immediately.
He was not in the baseline the whole way to 1st base it was the correct call
William Mize, True, but you should have said "running lane" not "baseline".
@Michael Heathman Wow, could you take a pill or get therapy or something? That is bottom crude.
Correct call. Immediately upon the interference it is a dead bal. All runners return to the previously touched base. No one scores, no one advances. Batter/runner is out for interference.
Right call. The batter/runner was in-between the throw and the 1B fielding the throw, making it harder for the 1B to field the throw. So that's interference, plain and simple. If he had been in the runner's lane (both feet inside), he would have been protected from the interference call, but he wasn't. Rule 6.05(j). Note: The commenters in the broadcast are morons. The batter is absolutely allowed to run inside the foul line, "in the field of play," he just isn't protected from an interference call if he does. Ultimately, the batter was lucky he didn't get drilled in back. Then you get both an interference call and a painful lesson.
Great Call!!!
4:06. Both baserunners left early.
@Flash_Jax you can’t do that in little league
Is it as of when balls leaves pitcher's hand or when ball reaches plate?
@@jfgm2202 by rule, it's when the ball "reaches the batter"; as the batter would normally hit the ball out in front of the plate, I generally interpret it as when the ball is over the dirt in front of home plate; the ball is covering that space pretty quick, it's tough to call it any more tightly than that
it wouldn't matter on this play however: since there was interference by the batter runner, all runners return to the base occupied at time of pitch. that said, I sure would like to have seen U1 and U2 at least reaching into their pockets for their red flags. without the RLI though, R2 would've been put back on 2B.
The LL rule reads that if you are on the line you are in the box the first part of the lane he was outside the last part he was in, bottom line if he wasn't in all the way he was outside the lane. RIGHT CALL!
No. Incorrect call. The catcher's throw to 1st was not hindered by the runner. The HP umpire bailed out the catcher for a bad throw that was outside of 1st.
The call was correct. But the umpires should have known that on any interference, the ball is dead and bases can't be run. The exasperating part of watching this was the time it took to finally place the runners correctly.
yeah, there is an exception to this rule, the runner is allowed to run outside the lane to avoid a player fielding the ball, which in this case was a bunt, if he ran to the right he would have been called for interference with the catcher picking up the ball which is why he ran to the left which is allowed, he is then allowed to run to the base....note in MOST interference calls the runner must either collide with the fielder or the ball has to hit him...neither happened here so it really comes down to the umps decisions, which is what makes these type of calls bullshit as the exception allowed him to run to avoid the fielded play at the plate.
@@jamesw71 There never needs to be contact or being hit by the ball in order to call interference.
Runnner on second base also left the base early before the ball crossed the plate on the pitch b
R2 might have been on third at the time of the interference. R1 was 1 step shy of second, but R2 was running faster than R1. The rule states that runners are returned to the base they last legally touched at the time of the interference, not at the time of the pitch or at the time of the batted ball.
Factually untrue. On offensive interference, no bases can be run. It took way too long but this crew eventually got it right.
@@FactsMatter LL Rules: "Offensive interference is an act by a member of the team at bat which interferes with, obstructs, impedes, hinder or confuses any fielder attempting to
make a play. If the umpire declares the batter, batter-runner or a runner out for interference, _all other runners shall return to the last base that was, in the judgment of the umpire, legally touched _*_at the time of the interference_*_ ,_ unless otherwise provided by these rules."
@@MaydayAggro If that is the case the interference happened well before the runner was even on 3rd base. If you pause the footage around the 1:08 mark the runner from second is about halfway to third when the interference would have occurred. Otherwise, I agree with the assessment you made. Man, I miss playing and umpiring. but being one-legged makes the game hard to do on either front lol.
@@dragula131 “last base legally touched at at the time of interference” is umpire discretion.
@@dragula131 how could there be interference at 1:08 when there's not even a throw yet? By the time we get a throw at 1:10, R2 is already out of frame.
Easy peasy.
Call "TIME!"
The batter-runner is OUT for a Runner's Lane Violation and baserunners return to their original bases.⚾️
yeah, there is an exception to this rule, the runner is allowed to run outside the lane to avoid a player fielding the ball, which in this case was a bunt, if he ran to the right he would have been called for interference with the catcher picking up the ball which is why he ran to the left which is allowed, he is then allowed to run to the base....note in MOST interference calls the runner must either collide with the fielder or the ball has to hit him...neither happened here so it really comes down to the umps decisions, which is what makes these type of calls bullshit as the exception allowed him to run to avoid the fielded play at the plate.
@@jamesw71 You are consistently wrong. No where does the rule book say that if he leaves the lane he can run straight to the base. What the rule does say is that the runner is required to be in the lane in order to be protected from interference. He was out of the lane and interfered with the fielder taking the throw at first base. RLI is 100% the correct call.
It was a correct call . However , they need to teach the first basemen how to create a throwing lane for the catcher
JL G if the runner is in his lane, the catcher has the whole field
The catcher needs to throw the ball inside the base. The runner is going to the base if you throw at the base it will always be a tough catch.
@dnnyshdy Thanks for the compliment but nobody is perfect. Having a catcher throw to the inside of the base is the proper technique. It keeps the runner and the ball away from each other and is much safer for the first baseman. In response to your off topic comment about pitchers. There still would be walks because pitchers throw balls on purpose to some batters.
@dnnyshdy I would have a reasonable discussion with you but you have shown yourself to be a useless troll. I will no longer waste my time.
@@vw8886 The runner CAN NOT be in the throwing lane that is why he was out.
For all the people that are saying that it is a simple error on 1st baseman and no interference did it occur to you that the reason he dropped it was because he was having trouble seeing the ball because the runner was where he was not supposed to be and in his way?
No. First baseman saw the ball all the way, and simply dropped it. Interference should not have been called.
Corby Gilmore sorry buddy - correct call was made
@@direcorbie correct!
@@terry6512 No Terry, Gilmore is wrong and you are too if you agree with him.
Exactly.....but keep in mind that those who don't see it that way are the ones who never read a rulebook and ALWAYS have to have the calls go their way!!
Simple, the runer tried to avoid stepping on his bat and stepping on the ball and ran around it. Good call Ump
This year's LLWS ups are really giving the pitchers that outside strike.
Batters better come hit
Geaux Texas Needville Texas is a very small town, what an achievement.
Batter can't run a straight line to first, because of where the ball drops after he bunts it.
Sure, but needing to avoid the ball doesn't give him an exception to having to get into the runner's lane halfway to the base. He only would get an exception if he had to run around a fielder.
UMPIRES MAKE THE RIGHT CALL
Correct call, but the throw from the catcher, unless on purpose, should have been further into fair territory with the 1st baseman more properly set up.
Easy call as runner was running in the field of play and not in the lane on way to 1st base.
True, but he did not interfere with the throw. Catcher made a good throw which the 1B saw all the way and simply dropped. Interference should not have been called.
@@direcorbie It doesn't matter, everyone who knows anything about baseball knows that running outside of the baseline is an automatic out.
@@direcorbie - I don't think he ever made a single step in the lane. They chalk it up for a reason. Automatic out.
@@lukek5303 Running outside the baseline is not an automatic out. Running outside the baseline causing interference or to avoid a tag is an automatic out.
@@stephenherring Duh
Correct call , however to slow in calling it
Doesn’t really matter as long as they get the call right. Plus I like to let things play out to see if I actually need to call anything. Most of the time I dont
@@jackjon7763 Except you would expect a competent group of umpires to make the call immediately, call time and place the runners. These guys seemed overly confused about what to do. When interference occurs, you make the call and kill the play immediately. You do not wait to see how things play out to make the call.
Last base touched, the runner from 1st touched 2nd before intfr, br is out and runners stay at 2nd and third, rule say last base "touched", not occupied or original base. wording is important here
All runners return to their time of pitch base. You have some work to do on rules.
That sure took a long time to figure out a pretty basic rule. They even had to call Daddy and Daddy had to explain again and again. Oh Boy.......
Correct call
hard to tell, but it APPEARS as though (at 0:07) that the batter/runner's right foot touches the baseline on his last step toward first base. IF that were the case, then that is sufficient compliance for the runner's lane interference requirement ("...either foot touching or inside the baseline..."). also at 0:07, i REALLY would have liked to see the plate umpire get farther down the first baseline, especially since the catcher is so far in front of home plate fielding the bunt and there will be no immediate play at the plate. if the plate umpire gets down the baseline, this would allow him better visibility of the play and he could immediately make (and just as importantly, SELL) the RLI violation, if in fact it occurs. yes, kudos to the crew for "huddling" and getting the call "right"; but a confident, well-placed plate umpire would have looked a whole lot better.
If I understand you correctly, youre saying that because the Batter-Runners foot appeared to be on the runners lane line on his last step? The call is made when the catcher releases the ball, which clearly BOTH feet are to the left and outside of the runners-lane lines, which makes it clear Runners Lane Interference.
LL baseball diamonds dimensions are very tight and it's easy to get crowded on some plays (batter actually ran to field side of bunted ball)... But it was a correct call as he NEVER got back to the runners lane and definitely changed the play...
He is not to be in the feild side of the ball. In any baseball they MUST be in the running lane he is not near being in the running lane.
@@63076topher There is no requirement to run in the running lane. There is only protection IF the batter runner interferes with the catch while in the running lane.
please show me where in the interference rule it states the runner must immediately get back into the lane after they have ran out to avoid causing interference with the fielded play by the catcher at the plate? It doesn't, and in fact it says he is allowed to leave again to get to the bag, nothing in the interference or lane rules state after he has legally left the lane that he must then immediately return, it states he must maintain a straight line to the bag which he did...he was clearly safe by those who actually know that the exception to the interference rule means. this was a horrible call, mostly because it was called right the first time and they decided to review it and got it horribly wrong because they didn't know the rules.
@@JPINFV agreed and it is usually only called if the ball hits the runner or the runner hits the fielder attempting to field or catch the ball, neither happened in this case, and the exception to the rule actually says the runner can leave the lane to avoid the fielder/ball and lane rules state he must only then make a straight line to the base, nothing says he must immediately return to the running lane
@@jamesw71 The runner never (at any point) was to the right of baseline and for most of the baseline was WELL to the left of the line. You might notice there is a running lane actually marked where the runner must get to the right side of the baseline or risk interference. I assume you know this because your such a knowledgeable baseball guy... Or so you say!
Why does LL implement these dumb rules? If you draw a straight line from the RH batters box to first base its in the field of play all the way down. The batter doesnt deviate from that line except to avoid contact with the ball. This penalizes RH batters because the field is small and the batters boxes extend way too far into the field of play
This isn't just little league. Mlb has the same rule. And that's also why the runner doesn't have to be in a lane until the last half of the baseline. He has plenty of time to get there and three white lines to tell him where he needs to be.
well to be true there is an exception to the interference rule which allows the runner to run outside the lane to avoid a fielded ball, like happened here, the officials got the call wrong all the way because of this, plus if the runner was in the lane the ball would have hit him because the catcher made a bad throw and the ball was thrown into foul territory side of the 1st base bag which is why the fielder missed it.
@@jamesw71 You have no clue as to how the running lane works. The umpires were 100% correct.
Part of the running lane rule specifies that for interference to occur, the throw must be a proper throw, meaning that it must be a catchable throw. Running lane violation centers around the runner affecting the ability of F3 to receive the throw after failing to protect himself from interference through establishing his base path in the running lane. Here, while the runner never established a proper base path, the throw was also very close to not being catchable because it was wide. However, this is a good call because the presence of the runner did affect the ability of F3 to move and cleanly catch the ball.
This is only in OBR that the throw has to be a “proper throw”. For NFHS it doesn’t. This was part of a local rules meeting I just watched for umpiring in the state of Ohio. As for LL rules I would imagine it is the same, but not entirely sure!!
I would argue that because the catcher throws the ball into the runners lane then it’s an error. Even if the runner is on the outside line he is still in the way because of the catchers throw across the baseline to the outside corner of the bag.
Proper throw is to inside corner of bag
@@charlesbarber5157 it does not have to be a proper throw according to NFHS rules. Not sure about LL rules. Also it’s a pretty good throw and the runner is not even close to the runners lane, he is 3-4 feet inside the first baseline. They got it right
@@owenzeiter4639 yea but by that logic is a runner is going to first I can make a throw across the baseline and then call foul for interference
@@charlesbarber5157 call foul? Your English is a little difficult to follow man. It’s interference, not sure why you think after review they wouldn’t get it right!
That’s a good call wow
I think the batter tried to avoid the ball in play but by doing so, he did run out of the baseline and therefore interfered. Good call but I don't think the batter did it intentionally.
His lane is CHALKED in white he is not near it.
@@63076topher yeah, there is an exception to this rule, the runner is allowed to run outside the lane to avoid a player fielding the ball, which in this case was a bunt, if he ran to the right he would have been called for interference with the catcher picking up the ball which is why he ran to the left which is allowed, he is then allowed to run to the base....note in MOST interference calls the runner must either collide with the fielder or the ball has to hit him...neither happened here so it really comes down to the umps decisions, which is what makes these type of calls bullshit as the exception allowed him to run to avoid the fielded play at the plate.
@@jamesw71 He interfered with the throw.
Intent by the batter/runner does not matter.
@@jamesw71 After the runner avoids the catcher, he needs to get back in the lane.
I won't bother posting my umpire resume or how many games I've umpired.
There are two questions an umpire has to ask him/herself in this situation. One was the runner outside the lane. If so did the runner effect the ability of the fielder to make the play. If you get yes to both you have an out for interference.
This crew was a little odd in all the conferencing it took to get to their call...
In this case, however, the answer to both questions was "no". The batter-runner is allowed to run outside the running lane. If he does so, and prevents the first baseman from making a play on the ball it is interference. Here, however, a)the runner is in the baseline by the time the ball arrives at first base, and b) the catcher actually makes a good throw, but the first baseman simply dropped it. In my opinion, given my experience as an umpire at the 13-16 year old level, this was a bad call by the plate umpire.
@@direcorbie that's not how we interprete that play. The runner will inevitably be at or close to the lane. But if he past the 45 foot mark, I guess in case it's 30 Foot, you need to bang him on runner lane if he affects a throw.
Yes this is a judgment call, but if a rater sees you rule this as not interference than he going to rate you down
@@thomasnaeger8960 I agree with you. However, in this case the runner did not affect the throw in any way., so your point is moot.
Well stick with your call. I don't see how the ball going over the runner out of the lane is not effecting the play. Remember contact is not required to call interference
Corby Gilmore I agree. The ball hits the web of the first baseman’s glove, that is a good throw and on target it’s an E-3. I’m not an umpire but I do coach and know the rules of baseball.
GOOD CALL , BLUE
So the runner tries to avoid running over or into the bunted ball, gets back into the running lane. Baseball rules are f$&ked up. No wonder there are out of control little league parents even if they understand most of the rules. Like they sometimes say in the NFL, let’s relax and let them play! Calls are supposed to be objective, right. We all know better. Look at the superimposed strike zone rectangle on tv in MLB, and how often home plate umps get it wrong! Keep the umps, so they can call balks, etc., close calls, et al, but as in the NFL, use replay technology. Becoming more and more technologically feasible in college, HS, and little league, obviously because we have this video, albeit not instantly reviewable by the umps.
Unless in an ELITE little league and/or travel league program, most of us as kids who loved to play the game are taught the basics and even advanced nuances, depending on our coaches’ and our parents’ knowledge of the rules of the game. Purists may say things like tough, learn the game. Maybe so, but sometimes when I watch these obscure anomalies of rules, I wonder if we are taking the fun away from kids? Worse yet, discouraging participation.
Yet, rules are rules. Sometimes I think umps are secretly giddy just waiting to spring an obscure rule interpretation showing their “mastery” of the rule book to make a call one way or another in the thinnest and narrowest “interpretation!” Good for them and their egos, but unfortunately sometimes the bring upon themselves the wrath of “little league parents.”
Who are you to question the rules of baseball? You are also ignorant. The official rule has nothing to do with the catcher’s throw. Running lane interference occurs when a batter/ runner impedes, hinders, or confuses a fielder at first base fielding a throw. When you run out of the running lane all the way to first base and only get in the lane to touch first base you forfeit your last stride protection into first base. It’s an obvious interference call. Doesn’t matter at all that the batter/ runner may have been avoided his hunted ball; that’s on him. What matters is did the batter/ runner interfere with the fielder attempting to glove a throw.
He never got in the lane he was on the grass then moved over but was still to the left of the line, runners lane or line was to the right where he was runnning.
The field is way to small for play at that age.
No it’s Normal
i agree somewhat, but a "no lead off" rule does enlarge the field in return
This is definitely interference but it was a horrible job by the plate umpire. That needs to be called right away by the plate umpire and only by the plate umpire. The conference was totally unnecessary and horrible. It was the right call at the end of the day but it was done incredibly bad. Just think if the kid sliding into 3rd base breaks his leg on a play that should have immediately been called dead and interference called and runners returned.
you are not familiar with the exceptions to the interference rule then...the batter is allowed to run out of the lane to avoid a fielded play, and nothing in the rule states he must then immediately return to the lane, in fact it says he can leave it again to get to the base.....plain and simple in the interference rule.
MLB rule is different. The runner establishes the base path. As long as he maintains the same path, it's not interference. Not sure of the little league rule. But it seems to me that once the batter establishes his path to the bag, as long as he maintains that path, it shouldn't be interference. I saw an MLB play where the runner ran 3 feet inside the line the whole way and the throw went off his back. Play was reviewed and result was no call, runner safe.
Incorrect.
OBR 5.09(a)(11): 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 judgement in doing so interferes with the fielder taking the throw at first base.
Exact same thing happened this year in CWS finals.
So this is little league rules that are much different than major league! Runners on 1st and 2nd , no outs,. bunt happens runner at first called out for interference , runners are forced to advance.. so,,, runners that were forced don't go back to original base! It should be, runners at 2nd and 3rd 1out ! It's double punishment to the offense , there is no such thing as double punishment for for defense or offense!!!
Bad ruling IMO at this level.. ,, the batter is already positioned inside the line..by his position in the RH batters box..IMO this should have been a judgement call as to whether he intentionally blocked the play..especially at this level.. he ran from his legal spot in the batters box to the foul line..three to four steps before the bag he was on the line...Much much different expectations should be applied to RH hitters vs left..
Lol... "at this level." This is little league dude.
@@michaelmeade8535 exactly my point,,dude.
@@BUSTER.BRATAMUS at this level the rules are much more defined than in the majors. Intent does not matter, nor is there an assumption of a good throw by the fielder. It is the batter/runner's job to get into the running lane whether they are right or left-handed.
If he was running to foul he would have wound up there he got in the way of the throw.
@@63076topher DRAW A LINE FROM WHERE HE STARTED TO WHERE HE ENDED UP...
good thing the first baseman dropped the ball, other wise no interference would be called
agreed, the runner would have been out anyway, the author stated in his text the runner beat the throw to first but he is wrong, he wasn't even close to beating the throw, pretty much because he had to run out of the baseline to avoid the play with the catcher picking up and throwing the ball, which he is allowed to do under the rules....umps got this one wrong, also the play at 3rd was too close to call, he looked safe as well but was called out on the tag, but the tag can't be seen so we have to trust the umps decision....again.
@@jamesw71 The umps were correct. Yes, the runner must avoid the fielder but he must get back in the lane or he is subject to being called out for the interference.
Horrible umpiring. Plate up never rules on fair/foul, makes no call regarding interference, then decides after the play to (correctly) call interference even though he didn’t actually see it nor call it.
Disaster.
mbcorc1 where are you getting that the batter beat the throw to first? He would have been out by a mile...not sure I would have called that interference though, he was back in the lane after having to first dodge the ball after he bunted it so he didn't interfere with the catch making the play picking it up. The problem here is the catchers throw to first base was inside the lane!!! The runner was on the line and would have interfered even if he was well inside the lane because of how bad the throw was. That was the reason the 1st baseman didn't catch it, catcher should have thrown it to the left of the runner instead of to the right, would have made the play at first much easier and possible double play attempt at 3rd base.
Even the call at 3rd was pretty bad, he looked safe to me, but was a bad angle so hard to tell when the tag was made, if it was made.
NOTHING "LITTLE" about this Little League anymore...
The batter also interfered with th3 catcher's attempt to field the ball.
A lot of leeway is given for batted balls near home plate. It's called "tangle/untangle". In regards to that, the batter is fine on this play.
Why does this take a crew meeting? This is all on the Home Plate Umpire, he is in great position. Make the call, kill the play.
Why did it take a 4 umpire conference to make this call? This call is Umpiring 101. It is made by plate umpire at all times and should be immediate and emphatic. The ball is dead immediately, batter-runner is out, all other runners return to the base the held at the time of the pitch.
Thank you. The plate umpire should not have been on the field. Little umpire volunteer system is a failure.
@@rayray4192 Even in the 2-man system the plate umpire would never enter fair ground on this play. His first responsibility is fair\foul on this play. He needs to take a step to his left in foul ground to look down the line and indicate fair\foul. His second responsibility is interference by the BR. His third job is to watch for a pulled foot by the 1st baseman. This PU did none of those things correctly because he moved up the first base line in foul ground. He was also out of position to make a call on the runner who came home at :10.
I worked over 3,000 ball games as an amateur umpire in both baseball and fastpitch softball. My association made it a point to use correct mechanics and to keep up with changes. We had exactly one LL contract and we universally hated to work that league. Not a single one of us used the mechanics put out by Little League. We used ASA fastpitch mechanics in that league because fastpitch mechanics call for the umpires to work outside the baselines, just like LL mechanics, until the ball went into the outfield. All of our other baseball contracts were with PONY league organizations where even the 12 year olds were leading off, stealing, and using the set position. We always worked inside on those games.
@@garygemmell3488 why are you directing your post to me?
@@rayray4192 Perhaps you should review your own posts?
@@garygemmell3488 not enough time. Double headers every day. If you have a need to say something say it.
Same happen to my son in the state tournament lastyear! The tieing run scored but was put back on third! The diff was that my son HAD to step on the foul line to get around the first baseman that came up for bunt but was called off by the catcher!
Was the bottom of last inning and he was the second out and next kid struck out eliminating us from the tournament)
Boo Hoo
Rick Smith nobody needs anything out of you
Fielder has the right to field the ball the runner must avoid the person fielding the ball. If the catcher call the first baseman and he is closer to the field the ball then if runner has to avoid the first baseman then it's obstruction
Then that wasnt the same thing
@@tracyyeary5970 1 fielder has the right to the ball. So if F2 fielded the ball, F3 doesn't have protection and should stay out of the way of the batter running attempting to reach 1st. It sounds like F3 obstructed the BR's path to 1st and if it would have been a close play (reasonable possibility that BR would have been safe if not for the obstruction), should have been awarded protection to 1st base (type B obstruction).
Proper call
It shouldn't have taken them that long to send the runners back to their original places on the bases & since these 4 umpires were good enough to be selected for regional's then they should have know what to do & not consult with who ever was on the radio talking to the plate umpire. Terrible job by the umpiring crew & I am a former umpire & coach
remember how every year they make a big deal about the fact that the LL umpires are "volunteers". well, when it comes to umpires, you get what you pay for. until LL pays umpires, this will happen every year. i can't even watch the LLWS any more. strike zone much??
@@cloudwatcher724 I know of a LL Umpire's Association that was actually paid to officiate LL Games starting with the 11 12 yr olds bracket all the way up to junior league 13 & 14 yr olds & Senior league 14 & 15 yr olds. Not all LL Umpires are your typical volunteer. As for the LL World Series Umpires give the 11 & 12 Yr olds a little bigger strikeout zone & for the most part the games are officiated quite well & each of the Umpires have to earn the right to make it to Williamsport or any other location that holds World Series games. I stand by my original comment that the Umpire who earned the right to officiate Regional Tournaments should not have taken that long to send the runners back.
it was a bad call against the batting team, but as it turned out, probably a better result.
It was absolutely the correct call.
I’ve never liked these calls……for one, he was barely inside the baseline chalk. Two, there is no “safety bag” at first occupying the designated runners lane. The catcher made a poor throw and the first baseman shoulda caught it, it then gets put on the runner and he is deemed at fault. It’s a very subjective rule and one I don’t really like…..if there was an orange bag to touch it’s much easier for the runner. But if they call interference then it’s a dead ball, runners return…..
you dont have to like the rules. But you do have to follow them.
Chaos in Waco.
Hmmm, unless the rules have changed, the ball must hit the runner on the throw for interference.
The rules have not changed. Ball never had to hit the runner for interference to be called.
That's only the rule in the Make Shit Up rule book, not in any actual one.
@@dukebuck Well no, it is not a made up rule. For the batter-runner, contact with the thrown ball does not have to be made. There are numerous links to this, but this might be a good start: baseball-rules.com/FAQs.htm#RUNL
@@dukebuck where can I get me one a dems Make Shit Up Rules books? From a Make Shit Up book store?🤣🤣🤣
Batter was dodging ball so as not to be interfering with play then came back into running lane , shoulda been legal
When was he EVER between the CHALKED lines?
Look up UMPIRES REVENGE . U tube
It looked like the batter tried to avoid the ball but she was back on the track before the catcher threw the ball. Don't think the catcher would have had a good line of sight anyway
Looked like the catcher hit the first baseman square in the glove to me
@@heyshipwreck5445You are right it also looks like the first baseman made a bad catch
That's what I saw
The whole way down, the batter-runner was running illegally. He has to be running in the runner's lane (between the foul line and the white line to the right of it) or he could be called for interference.
This is a 60/90 field. There is no way they are playing on a 40/60 field.
thats crazy!!
Bad call. He got back inside the line before the throw.
You can't be serious. The runner was never in the lane. Either there is something seriously wrong with your eyes or you don't know how the running lane works.
Let me first say that I may very well be wrong lol. I have always been taught that if the ball didn’t hit the runner, it’s not a lane violation. Of course, it’s travel softball, but we use high school federation rules. Just as you can’t call interference or obstruction without contact, it’s always been contact that causes the call to be made. As I said, I may be wrong. I’ll have to dig out my book and do some research. Thoughts?
Yes, you are wrong.... on both statements.
You are mistaken in all codes. It's ok. There are a lot of complicated rules in baseball.
The person(s) who taught you never read the definitions section of the rule book. Specifically, they did not read the definition of interference.
"The act of an offensive player or team member, umpire or spectator that impedes, hinders, or confuses a defensive player attempting to execute a play. Contact is not necessary."
Although some high school umpires think it is, contact is not a requirement in any form of interference or obstruction, baseball or softball.
@@dogpatch75 The "rule benders" would say otherwise. But they are wrong!
That was a de signed play to interfiere with the throw. Now, the size of them Kids to the adults is scary
Let the kids play ball. Umpire 503 LL
John Wheater huh?
@@bmcorc1 LOL!!!!!!! …….^^^^^ !!!!!!!
Quick Question (and nothing to do with Batter/Runner Interference), if you stop the video at 4:07 you will see the runner on Second and First leave before the ball arrives to the batter. Is this a case of the runner leaving early? This is for my Umpire Knowledge. If this is the case how would the Umpires rule that. No play and runners return back to their previous occupied base and the Hitter returns to the box. Thank you for your help.
No, the runners are allowed to leave when the ball leaves the pitcher's hand! Up till then they are required to stay "on the bag"! They were sent back to the original bases to prevent the "interfering" team from gaining any advantage from the runner's interference! Hope this cleared it up!
@@oldschooldiy3240 Rule 7.13: When a pitcher is contacting the pitcher’s plate and in possession of the ball, and the catcher is in the catcher’s box ready to receive delivery of the ball, baserunners shall not leave their bases until the ball has been delivered and reached the batter.
Sorry but in majors and below its crossing the plate. This is LL, not travel or Pony
Yes you are correct. In LL Major and below, they cannot leave until the all reaches the plate. They missed it
Rule 7.13: When a pitcher is contacting the pitcher’s plate and in possession of the ball, and the catcher is in the catcher’s box ready to receive delivery of the ball, baserunners shall not leave their bases until the ball has been delivered and reached the batter.
none of the replies seem to completely answer your question, so I'll add my answer. First, mechanics: the umpire (U2 in this case) should drop a red flag when the runner leaves early, but should make no other signal or verbal. In the actual play in the video, RLI supersedes R2 leaving early, so even if it had been called it wouldn't have mattered.
Let us assume however that there was no RLI. In this instance, regardless of whether BR was safe or out at first, but all other action proceeded the same as in the video, then U2 would call time at the end of all playing action; R2 would be returned to 2B, the run taken off the board, and the out on R1 at 3B would stand. The reason it doesn't matter whether BR is safe or out at first is that only R1 can be returned to 1B, but R1 is out at 3B and the out stands. R2 can only be returned as far back as the originally occupied base, 2B. If R1 had been safe at 3B, then it would matter whether BR was out or not - R1 would be returned to 1B, but if BR is on 1B then R1 is forced to 2B; likewise, R2 would be returned to 2B, but if 2B is occupied then he is forced to 3B.
But again, in this actual play, RLI supersedes the rest. As soon as RLI occurs, even if called after the play is over, the ball is immediately dead, the BR is out, and all runners return to their original bases.
Some leagues that cannot leave the base until the ball crosses the plate. It's a dead ball and runner is out. But can call only one runner out. Have bases loaded and all three leave early only one runner can be called out. Most likely it would be the runner at third.
you cant run on the grass..must be in the base line between white line..batter out at 1st..
It is interference by rule but announcer saying he had no lane to throw it was incorrect. Catcher should have taken his setup step further in the field of play and not throw to the outside of the bag. Catcher played that very badly or was never coached on how to throw down to first.
Sad thing is the running inside the baseline had no effect on the first baseman dropping the ball
You're joking, right??.........…….......................
Correct. By the time the catcher made the throw, the runner was fully in the running lane (dirt). The catcher threw it to the far side of the bag. Had the runner been in the base path the whole time, it still would have been a terrible throw and likely would have been missed. When the runner was in the grass, the catcher hadn't even secured the ball. It may be interference by rule, but the runner didn't interfere with the throw. The throw was just off-target, and the 1B didn't establish a throwing lane for his catcher.
@@McScott76 where? the BR was never in the lane, not once.
Couldn’t see the throw coming
So announcers, even at the LL level, don't know squat about baseball.
I watched without volume Alan. Never heard the announcers. Plate umpire is unqualified. Why not hire and pay the local high school umpires?
@@rayray4192 the announcers initially said the runners are allowed to advance 60 feet. All these umpires are unqualified if they have to huddle and discuss where to place the runners. Very bad.
@@alanhess9306 The players deserve better. It’s sad that Little League refuses to hire qualified umpires. They are in love with their volunteer system. The volunteer system is a miserable failure. Every year I sit down with a beer and guacamole and salsa and chips to watch the Little League World Series and every year I’m disappointed in the Little League decision to not hire local umpires to work their tournament. I was in Williamsport 6 months ago- beautiful river town with rolling forested hills. Why not hire Williamsport high school umpires to work the games? You and I would have immediately made a dynamic call of time out and interference and then immediately pointed runners back to their time of pitch base. I would direct R-1 back to first base and then R-2 back to second base. The antithesis of how we award runners bases to advance. This pathetic display of umpiring is so bad it’s disgusting. Did the umpire crew not know the rule for for runner placement, or did they not know where the runners were at the time of the pitch? Perhaps both. Hope you are well and happy and enjoying the World Series. The umpires have been outstanding. I don’t care who wins so I’m rooting for the umpires.
@@alanhess9306 I watched with audio on today. At some point I thought I heard a broadcaster get the runner placement correct.
@@rayray4192 Eventually they did.
The MLB umps got this call wrong in the 1969 World Series!
No it hit the runner in the world series
4 umps for LL game double A uses 2 lol
AA uses 3
Double AA uses 3 man crew
actually it's a 6 man crew. It's the little league world series, not regular season; even at district level, we use 4 man crews for all quarter-final and higher games, and certainly always 4 man for section and state games
Here's one thing: look at how the catcher forces the batter to avoid him with his move from behind the plate. I think honestly, a case could be made that the catcher initially obstructed the running path of the batter. The ruling was handled well by all involved, and sportsmanship was respected.
Catcher was making a play on a batted ball. So the runner needs to avoid him.
@@stevehamman4465, runner did that. The interference was with the throw. Runner went inside the line to avoid the catcher.
@@albertlilly The runner had plenty of time to get into the lane. The correct call was made.
@@alanhess9306, plenty being a relative term, I agree still with the call. But I think a case could also be made for catcher interference.
@@albertlilly The catcher cannot be guilty of interference when attempting to play on a batted ball. The catcher has the absolute right of way.
Bad throw on catcher an first needs to learn how to squeeze his glove. When a runner rounds 3rd an steps on grass there not out. Lol at all the little league pro umpires in the comments.
The only reason this happened is because the batter was giving the catcher room to make the play.
GOOD ONE!!!!......LOL!!!!!!!!
Give this umpire Joe West's or Angel Hernandez' or (insert shitty MLB umpire name)'s job!
I just wanna know why it was because when the glove hit him he was in the base path
He was never "in the runner's lane"! It's not what hit him, it's the catcher could not make a clean throw to first because of where the batter was running! He was not between the two chalk lines, as required!
It doesn't matter where the ball is or where the glove is. Its all about the location of the runner
This why u teach your first baseman inside/outside with balls from the catcher
oldschooldiy. he was out the lane to avoid the ball, then hopped n back in. He was smart. Unfair call.
@@joecameron1818 He must be in the lane. He was out of the lane and interfered with the play. Absolutely 100% correct call.
Bad call 1st baseman and Cather eyeline was never interfered with. Safe
Wrong.
It’s not fair to right handed batters. It is the right call. All of baseball needs a double bag at first to solve this problem.
shouldn't minor leagues have minor rules, lol!!
Not inference. Bad call.
Because you don't know the rule does not mean it was a bad call.
who's the MILF at :19 ?
Heeeey that's my mom lmao 😂😂
She looks like a party
As an umpire of 35 years, mostly NCAA, including post season, I'll give my opinion on what you have here: an error on the first baseman, that's it. I've got no infraction by the batter-runner. I'm disturbed by how many are posting here who have little to no understanding of the rules of the game, which I taught in a clinic for 14 years. In baseball, you don't have anything until it happens.
First off, the aforementioned "runner's lane" is only the last few feet before first base. On a regulation field, it's 45 feet long from first base. In this runner's lane the batter-runner is protected from being called for interference (unless he physically prevents a defensive player from tagging him, like slapping the defensive player's glove, etc.). A batter-runner is considered "Inside" the runner's lane if his feet hit the ground within it - and that would include the chalk lines.
Now, here's the most important thing to remember: the only moment that is relevant to judging whether or not the batter-runner might have committed interference is at the precise moment a play or attempt play is being made. If no play is being made, then you've got nothing. On this particular play, the "only" moment that comes into scrutiny is when the thrown ball (from the catcher) is passing at or near the batter-runner. Based on the slow replay, it is clear when the ball is passing near/over the left shoulder of the batter-runner, you can see at that precise moment the batter-runner's feet (over two steps) come down on the foul line beyond the starting point of the runner's lane. The foul line is "inside" and part of the runner's lane. Then the ball passes the batter-runner and is missed by the first baseman prior to the batter-runner reaching the base.
To make it easier to understand, let's say the thrown ball from the catcher would have hit the batter-runner on his shoulder or in his back. The only thing that matters is the exact position or spot the batter-runner is in. If he's in the runner's lane (as shown with his feet coming down on the foul line) then the batter-runner is protected from being charged with interference.
Folks, the bottom line here is all you've got is the first baseman missing the ball. That's why you'll often hear when a catcher complains the batter-runner was out of the runner's lane, his coach will say "next time drill him in his back or the back of the head."
And for anyone who's thinking ahead on this, do not compare this situation to batter's interference on a catcher on an attempted steal throw down. Two different situations.
I'm sorry, but especially in a college game, if an umpire calls this, he's going to have to explain to the conference chief.
It's a clear cut RLI. No quality of throw is required here. Immediate dead ball. BR is out, runners return. Not sure what you're missing here, sir.
It's great to know the rules, which you do (except you are wrong about the running lane being only the last few feet. It's the last half of the distance between home and first, and is clearly marked on this field), but you still have to see the play correctly in order to apply them properly. In this video, at no time did the batter/baserunner EVER take a step that was entirely inside the running lane. He was outside the running lane, and in fair territory, his entire trip to first, and ended up interfering with the fielder being able to take the throw. Every step he took, he had at least part of his foot in fair territory. If his foot is half on the foul line and half in fair territory, he is OUT of the running lane.
@@JohnDoe-bz3ci the "protected" running lane for the batter-runner is the last half of the distance from home to first. How am I wrong on that? But I do agree with you that we're looking at a video and wasn't there to see the play live from the field - and in fairness to the umpires on the field, they made a different call but was overturned by the booth, is that not correct? I'm just saying if you're an umpire in the minors and you make this ruling, I don't think you'll ever see a major league stadium.
@@guyfroml You said the runner's lane is "only the last few feet before first base". It's the last half of the base line, not just the last few feet. At first the umps called the batter/runner safe at first, but after conversing, they called him out, which was the right call, because the runner was clearly running in the field of play the entire trip to first. It wasn't even close. He was clearly running in the field of play the whole time, and I'm surprised you couldn't see that at regular speed. They did not get overturned by the booth. They should have made the call immediately, though, without having to talk to each other. Unfortunately, apparently none of them knew where to place the baserunners after the play was over, and had to go to the booth to get instructions on that. As an assigner of umpires for 20 years, I would be glad that they got everything right in the end, but upset because they didn't make the interference call immediately, and out of 4 umps, none of them knew where to put the runners.
@@JohnDoe-bz3ci When I referred to "last few feet" I was being ambiguous to do my not knowing what the distance would be on a little league field. I only worked high school, college and pro ball. I only know for certain what the distance/length is on those levels. And "clearly" (by my experience) is a subjective term.
Horrible call, you shouldn't show the replay, the runner was clearly in the running lane. Horrible call.
You are totally out of touch with reality. The runner was never in the lane. Interference is absolutely the correct call.
Plate umpire was watching the play but failed to call batters interference, this is a text book interference call. I'm not sure how this umpire got selected to do a regional game. There are many umpires who have been umpiring for over 20 years and are great at what they do but never get the call to do a regional game. The selective process needs to be improved to weed out umpires who miss simple calls like this one
He may have been watching the play but it wasn't his call to make.
@@csxfloridafunnelrailfan3065 It's the plate umpires responsibility to watch the running lane and call interference why do you think he asked for help.
You're right. The call being up the baseline, he could have called it too. I've just always seen it called by the 1B umpire. So I suppose it actually could have been either umpire's call. But since it wasn't called during the play, the UIC had to discuss it with his base umpires. It would actually be improper protocol for him to make the call after the play without doing that.
When he touched the grass he is OUT!
He is not out for simply running on the wrong side all the foul line. He has to interfere with a throw in the umpires judgement. Which he did. If the catcher didn't throw to first that runner would have been safe.
Steven Phillips absolutely ridiculous. You need a new rule book if you even have one. Which I’m thinking you don’t
Nope
My grandsons are very good players, but won't play because they told me the umpires screws up the game. I don't watch pro sports for the same reasons. Pro foot ball that is not worth watching anymore
Always someone else's fault, huh?
If you like all the rules some good some stupid. Your welcome to watch, I play in the 70's and I guess every thing change. I simple don't like to watch it anymore, and I'm happy my grand kids don't care to play.
Every grand kids are" very good players," even when they suck. Im sure thats not the reason there not playing. You shouldnt give up on a game your supposed to love just because the umps make a few bad calls. Its not all about winning, the umps dont screw it up that bad. Im mean hell there only human, but i guess nobody can be as perfect as your sweet lil grandkids
Sounds like your grandsons are whiny little idiots. Glad they aren't playing.
Then theyre not very good players. Because umpires good and bad calls are part of the gane.
Ball is dead immediately and the Batter/runner is out and all other base runners return to the base they occupied at the pitch! How basic and common is this rule?!
WHY ALL THE CONFUSION!!!!
UMPIRE INCOMPETENCE - ALL OF THEM!!!!!!!!!
This is the wrong call, yes she was out because she was out of the baseline but there was no interviewence, the ball never touched the baseruner, what?
If the runner is out of the lane and hinders the fielder's ability to catch the throw, we have interference. The throw does not need to hit the runner for interference to be called.
@@alanhess9306 the thing is the ball never touched her
@@coreyhill681 As I said, by rule, the ball does not need to touch the runner for interference to be called.. Any hindrance of the fielder when the runner is out of the lane is interference
What a call. The umps
Make their own rule. Crazy call
Read a rulebook before making such an ignorant comment.
What game was that umpire watching? The batter is allowed to run in the baseline. I played professional baseball.
Rich McClelland, I've said it often but I'll say it again. Players have an extremely limited knowledge of the rules. You are proof of that.
Alan: Some do - some don't. After playing two years of minor league baseball, I went to law school. That runner was moving to his left to try and avoid contact. He did not intentionally try to bowl him over and should not have been thrown out of the game.
@@Rich-xb3xk Rich, It appears you are not commenting on the correct video. In this video, the batter-runner was out of the running lane the entire way to first base. He interfered with the fielder taking the throw. This is textbook running lane interference. Good call. There was no one bowled over and there was no one thrown out of the game.
Alan: Then we are talking about tow different videos. The video to which I replied had the runner tossed out of the game. The base line is 3 feet either side of the line. You do not have to run on the line. If he was more than 3 feet off the line, the ump would have needed a tape measurer.
@@Rich-xb3xk am I missing something? I don't see the ejection nor anyone being bowled over. The runner, in this video, must be in the running lane. It was not a situation where he was out of his basepath, he was out of the running lane which prevented the fielder from fielding the throw.
ok so lets observe this , due to where the batter was running the catcher should have made a throw away from 1st more towards 2nd , if so we aren't having this conversation...
How about the runner having both feet in the running lane like he should have? If he ran where he should have, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
This should have been a dead ball call anyway, as in slowing the video both base runners clearly left the bases before the ball got to home plate, and should both have been called out. It happens between 4:06 and 4:07 seconds. It doesn't even look like the ball hadn't quite left the green and onto the dirt at home plate before they left their bases. In LL, the players may not leave their bases until the ball reaches the plate.**
** Edited thanks to Wolf Pack Judo. While I did say it correctly in the beginning of my comment, at the end of it, I originally said the base runners couldn't leave their bases until the ball crosses the plate. The rule is they cannot leave until it REACHES the plate.
Or maybe the fielding team teaches their catchers and first baseman fundamental badeball. Using communication to plan either a inside or outside throw depending on where the runner is. Thats not interference. 3 feet both sides of the chalk.
@@RHammer1983 Yes, the catcher should have yelled inside or outside, however the batter was very clearly well within the grass and I would have made the same call the umpires did there. It looks like he was well outside of the allowed running lane. Either way, they could have called everyone out (if there were no outs), as both runners left the bases early and the batter interfered with the throw to first base. I actually do agree with you the catcher should have called inside for the throw to the first baseman, but I'm thinking he popped up possibly with the thought of throwing to another base player to try to get more than one out on a forced double play.
2200 baseball games umpired for me. 1000 of those are travel ages 12-14. Thats how your taught to run to first. 3 feet each way is the rule. Great bunt by that kid and he has to avoid making contact with the catcher.
@@RHammer1983 I'm not arguing the rule, and I completely agree the catcher should have called inside or outside, but as I said, it kind of looked like he was contemplating a throw to third base before he went to first. Regardless, both of the base runners should have been called out for leaving the bases before the ball arrived at the plate. I concede to the argument regarding the batter, and I agree it was a great bunt. I'm focusing on the base runners, not the batter. Whether the batter interfered with the throw to first is questionable, but there is no doubt the base runners left early, and should have been called out.
The main issue is you have 12 year olds who are good enough to beat varsity high school teams, are forced to little league rules like short base paths. They should be leading off and have more feet for a catcher to make a play on a bunt.
there isn't anything LITTLE about little league ball anymore!! it's a joke!
Harley Grit what does that mean?
Bad call
Because you don't understand the rule does not make it a bad call.
@@alanhess9306 🧢
@@itssean3457 You are clueless
Why are you advancing Runners when it's a dead ball. The runner was not in the running Lane that did not cause or has no bearing on that guy catching the ball to dead ball nobody advances everybody stays where they're at. Wayne on here got it right way to go guy you must be a good umpire