Ball Boy Interference No. 1

The D-backs hosted the Blue Jays on April 17, 2026. In the top of the seventh, Andrés Giménez, facing Michael Soroka, hit a shot down the right-field line. Giménez circled the bases and was called out at third by umpire Alex MacKay. But the umpires ruled that the ball boy down the right-field line interfered with the play, and Giménez was placed at second base.

Ruleball Comments

Unintentional Interference by Authorized On-Field Personnel — Rule 6.01(d)

• When a bat boy/girl or ball boy/girl, ball attendant, security officer, policeman, etc. interferes with a play, interference is only called if the interference is intentional. Because they are authorized to be on the playing field, as long as they attempt to avoid a fielder or the ball, there should be no call because interference in these situations is decided on the basis of their actions.
• So, what is considered intentional interference by authorized on-field personnel?
• If they field a thrown or batted ball, intentionally kick the ball, pick up the ball, or push the ball, those are all criteria for the call of intentional interference. In those situations, the interference is treated like spectator interference. The umpires will call “Time” and place the runner(s) where, in their judgment, the runner(s) would have advanced had the interference not occurred. The placement of runners is arbitrary and is not an automatic base award.

Ball Boy Interference No. 2

Four days after the April 17, 2026 ball boy interference, the D-backs were involved in another ball boy interference play that should have been called but wasn’t. It led to an inside-the-park home run for Sam Antonacci of the White Sox, his first career home run.

In the top of the ninth, the White Sox had Everson Pereira on first and nobody out when Antonacci lined an extra-base hit just inside the left-field line against reliever Ryan Thompson. The ball was clearly intentionally touched by the ball boy, who attempted to field it. Left fielder Lourdes Gurriel Jr. stopped pursuing the ball, thinking the ball was dead.

Antonacci never stopped running. By the time Gurriel Jr. threw the baseball back in, Antonacci was sliding safely into home.

White Sox manager Will Venable said, “An interesting play. Credit to both those guys for continuing to play.”

The White Sox won 11-5.

The Rangers’ Wyatt Langford had been the last player to record an inside-the-park home run for his first career homer on April 28, 2024. Kevin Bell had been the last player to do it for the White Sox on June 22, 1976.

Ruleball Comments

• The initial determination of whether interference occurred can only be made by the crew on the field. Replay is not permitted to rule on whether intentional interference occurred. Only the placement of runners following a call of intentional interference by on-field personnel is reviewable.
• Had the crew called interference, the runner placement would have been reviewable.
• The lesson here is for the defensive player (Gurriel Jr.) to continue to play the ball in case the umpires do not make a call.
• Offensively, keep running, as Pereira and Antonacci did.
• In the above plays, the ball boy intentionally interfered with the play as he attempted to field the ball.
• Former Mets manager Terry Collins was ejected from the Mets’ 2-1 loss to Milwaukee on June 1, 2017, at Citi Field for arguing a bat boy interference play, in which Mets’ third baseman Wilmer Flores collided with a bat boy as he attempted to catch a foul pop.
• With the bases loaded and one out in the fourth inning, Eric Sogard lifted a pop-up near the Brewers’ dugout. As Flores drifted over to catch it, a bat boy trying to get out of the way and carrying his seat, made contact with Flores’ hand and body as he attempted to avoid Flores. The ball was not caught. Initially, plate umpire Roberto Ortiz ruled Sogard out via interference. But after a brief conference, the crew, headed by crew chief Fieldin Culbreth, cited rule 6.01 (d) which states that an interference call is only relevant if the contact is intentional. In this play, the bat boy clearly interfered with the play when he attempted to avoid the fielder. But by
  rule, there was no interference because the bat boy did not intend to field the ball and was attempting to avoid the fielder.
• The play was ruled a foul ball despite the interference of the bat boy and Collins cried “foul.” As soon as the umpires reversed the call, the irate Mets skipper raced out of the dugout, arguing animatedly for several moments until Culbreth ejected him.

Rich Marazzi

Rules consultant/analyst:  Angels, Dodgers, Mets, Nationals,  Padres, Phillies, Pirates, Red Sox, Rangers, Royals, Tigers, Twins, White Sox, Yankees, YES, and Chicago Sports Network