interference

[lvtwft]

swinging bunt, 3 feet in front of the plate.catcher gets it over throws first. runner was inside the line but did not interfere with throw. ump called interference and runner out.. right call? high school.. thanks

[Bretman]

The only association where I've ever seen a ruling that the batter-runner being out of the lane causes a throw to be over F3's head should be interference is high school baseball. And it's a crummy ruling. All other baseball and softball rule sets I'm aware of require the throw to first to be a "quality throw" before interference can be ruled.

By "quality throw", it means a throw directed at the fielder receiving it and in close enough proximity to the fielder that there would be some reasonable chance of it being caught. The premise is that an actual chance for an out needs to be prevented before we can rule interference and award an out.

If the catcher makes a bad throw, one where no out could have reasonably been expected, then it's just that...a bad throw. Live ball and play on.

[Battle]

The only association where I've ever seen a ruling that the batter-runner being out of the lane causes a throw to be over F3's head should be interference is high school baseball. And it's a crummy ruling. All other baseball and softball rule sets I'm aware of require the throw to first to be a "quality throw" before interference can be ruled.

By "quality throw", it means a throw directed at the fielder receiving it and in close enough proximity to the fielder that there would be some reasonable chance of it being caught. The premise is that an actual chance for an out needs to be prevented before we can rule interference and award an out.

If the catcher makes a bad throw, one where no out could have reasonably been expected, then it's just that...a bad throw. Live ball and play on.

But if the runner is far enough inside the line, she would be in direct line of F3 and cause the over throw. Could this be the ruling that was made?

[Bretman]

But if the runner is far enough inside the line, she would be in direct line of F3 and cause the over throw. Could this be the ruling that was made?

It might be why the umpire made the ruling, but it would not be the correct ruling.

[HugoTafurst]

swinging bunt, 3 feet in front of the plate.catcher gets it over throws first. runner was inside the line but did not interfere with throw. ump called interference and runner out.. right call? high school.. thanks

Who said "...but did not interfere with throw", you or the umpire?
Maybe the umpire did believe that the BR interfered....... maybe the umpire believed that although the throw was a little high, F3 could have caught it but the BR being out of the lane hindered his ability to see the thrown ball and effected his timing......

If that was the umpire's reasoning, he made the correct call...

On the other hand if his reasoning was the BR caused F2 to make a bad throw, see Bretman's answer...