Two Runner Interference Plays in 2024
Runner Interference Rule with Infield Fly Rule
For the third time this season, there was a runner interference call in the middle of an Infield Fly rule play.
The Mariners and Red Sox played at Fenway on July 31, 2024. With one out and runners at first and second in the bottom of the seventh inning, Rafael Devers hit a fly ball in the area of first base. The umpires invoked the Infield Fly rule. Tyler O’Neil, the Red Sox runner on first base, collided with Mariners first baseman Justin Turner as he attempted to return to first. First base umpire John Bacon and second base umpire Andy Fletcher both invoked the IFR. The umpires declared Devers out because of the IFR and O’Neil out for interference ending the inning.
Sox manager Alex Cora argued with the umpires to no avail.
Ruleball Comments
- By rule, this was the right call. It is the responsibility of the runner to avoid the fielder who is protected in such situations. The runner should locate the fielder as soon as the IFR is called or most likely will be called and make every attempt to avoid the fielder. O’Neil did not locate Turner.
- In my opinion, the rule needs to be revisited. Because the batter is out due to the IFR, does the punishment (ruling a double play) fit the crime if there is no runner advancement?
- There is precedent in the rule book for such thinking. If the batter interferes with the catcher when he is throwing to a base in an attempt to retire a runner who is attempting to steal a base, and the runner is retired, the interference is nullified unless it is strike three on the batter in which case both the batter and the runner are out; If a batter-runner is running illegally the last 45-feet between home and first, there is no interference if the defensive team retires the runner; If a catcher interference with a batter and he reaches base safely, the interference is nullified. If there are multiple runners on base and catcher’s interference occurs, the interference is nullified if all runners including the batter-runner advance one base on the play.
- Regarding runner’s interference in a IFR situation, in my opinion, the umpire should point to the interference and at the conclusion of the play, keep the runners at the base they occupied at the start of play if interference is called unless there is runner advancement.
- Let’s say that Turner dropped the ball because of O’Neil’s interference and the ball squirted several feet away. If Jarren Duran, the runner on second, advanced to third, then I would call O’Neil out and return Duran to second if there were less than two outs.
- In the Turner/O’Neil play, the umpires had to decide which defensive player to protect for the purpose of the interference rule- the first baseman (Turner ) or the second baseman (Jorge Polanco). Per rule 6.01 (a) (10), “…if two or more fielders attempt to field a batted ball, and the runner comes in contact with one or more of them, the umpire shall determine which fielder is entitled to the benefit of this rule, and not declare the runner out for coming in contact with a fielder other than the one the umpire determines to be entitled to field such a ball.”
- In the above play, the umpires determined that Turner was entitled to field the ball. If you watch the video, it appears that initially Turner should be entitled to the ball, but if you observe the actions of Polanco, it appears that the wind might have blown the ball toward Polanco. This play was a difficult play as to which fielder the umpires would protect-Turner or Polanco. Once the umpires decided to protect Turner, I think it was too late to change their decision to Polanco.
- If the umpires protected Polanco, and O’Neil collided with Turner, this would be a Type 2 obstruction on Turner because the play was not being directly made on O’Neil if he was impeded going back to first. But O’Neil would remain at first base because the obstruction would not impact the play.
- Another possibility is that O’Neil’s contact with Turner is what forced Polanco to make the play.
- Also, did Turner initiate the contact with O’Neil? That is always difficult to prove, and I doubt if the umpires would call that and in my opinion that did not happen in this play.
Batter-Runner Interference: Rule 5.09 (a) (11)
The Yankees hosted the Mets on July 24, 2024. In the bottom of the sixth, Oswaldo Cabrera was batting with DJ LeMahieu on first and two outs. Cabrera hit a tapper in front of the plate that was fielded by Danny Young. The Mets pitcher threw wildly past first baseman Pete Alonso. LeMahieu ended up on third and Cabrera reached first. Young was charged with a throwing error.
Mets manager Carlos Mendoza argued that Cabrera was running out of the Runner’s Lane and interfered with Alonso who was taking the throw, but plate ump Andy Fletcher made no call.
Ruleball Comments
- Fletcher made no call because the throw was not a quality throw that could have retired the runner. I agree with this judgment.
- This season the Runner’s Lane between home and first was widened on the fair side of the foul line. If the batter-runner is running on the dirt in fair territory or in the 45-foot long, 3-foot wide Runner’s Lane, he is protected from the batter-runner interference call unless intent is involved.
- Running in the dirt is good, running on the grass is bad.
- There is no doubt that Cabrera was running on the grass the last 45-feet between home and first, but as stated the reason why the interference call was not invoked by Fletcher is because Young did not make a quality throw to first base that would have a chance to retire Cabrera.
- The rule has different layers. There must be a throw and it must be a quality throw.
- One of the broadcasters incorrectly said that the position of Cabrera is what caused the bad throw. That is an incorrect interpretation of the rule. The onus is on the defensive team to make a quality throw regardless of the position of the batter-runner.
- I cannot endorse any act that might cause an injury, but the thrower in such situations, usually the pitcher or the catcher, will sometimes intentionally drill the batter-runner to influence the call. If the throw is still an errant throw, there is no guarantee the umpire will invoke the interference rule.
- Umpires try to make the batter-runner invisible and determine if the throw that was made could have retired the batter-runner if he was not running to the base.
Rich Marazzi
Rules consultant/analyst: Angels, D’backs, Dodgers, Mets, Nationals, Orioles, Padres, Phillies, Pirates, Red Sox, Rangers, Royals, Tigers, Twins, White Sox, Yankees, YES, and NBC Sports Chicago.