USSSA Out caused by causing a throw?

Rous

Addicted to Softballfans
We were in the third base dugout, based loaded, no outs.

Batter hit a grounder to the third baseman; all runners took off. The third baseman stepped on third (out #1) and threw home. The catcher tagged out the runner who had been on third (out #2) and then threw back to third base as the runner who had been on second when the play started had continued towards third (trotting past the shortstop as the ball got back to third base). The third baseman caught the ball and went to tag the runner (who had been out #2 by force). The runner did make a move to avoid his tag although was tagged quickly. Then the umpire called the guy standing on second (who had started the play on first) out (out #3) because "the base runner who had been out by force caused the catcher to throw to third." They did not say it was because he tried to avoid the tag, but because he had continued towards third (which is also in the direction of our dugout).

If this is the right call, what should the runner have done? I never asked him if he had seen the third baseman step on third, but I suspect he did (I can't see how that matters though).
 

MaverickAH

Well-Known Member
I would say that it was more than a bit of a reach for an umpire to call interference on a runner for continuing to advance towards a base he was naturally advancing to after being put out. He can't simply disappear into thin air!

The defense also has a responsibility to know what's going on. It sounds like the catcher knew that the out was recorded at 3B first by the fact that he tagged the runner going home. So why did he throw back to 3B? Did the umpire make a clear, loud vocal indication of the first recorded out? If the catcher, who is the closest player to the umpire, wasn't sure of the out at 3B, why would you be certain that the runner was?

Personally, I wouldn't have made that call unless there were extenuating circumstances.
 
Last edited:

NCASAUmp

Un-Retired
If a retired runner or a runner who has scored causes interference, the runner closest to home is called out. Continuing to run and drawing a throw is considered interference.

Now, two things about this. First, for it to be interference, there has to be a play available that the defense could’ve made. If everyone else was standing on their bases at the instant of the throw, then there wasn’t an out to be gained, and there can be no interference.

Second, it’s umpire’s judgment as to whether it looked like the runner was continuing to run the bases. Sometimes, the defense just needs to be a little more aware of the situation. However, from your description, it sounds like he was continuing to run. Was the runner close to the base line between second and third? Did it look like he was running fast? All of these things matter.
 

ilyk2win

Addicted to Softballfans
How friggin slow was he (R2) that there was time to step on third, throw home, apply a tag, throw back to third and then still have room to "make a move to avoid the tag"?

Without knowing the level of the league, you also can't (in this forum) discount that the catcher might just not be as "instinctual" about the game as we'd assume everyone is/should be. It's not like teams put their top players behind the plate.
 

Rous

Addicted to Softballfans
This is E league and the other team was yelling "tag him" to the catcher. Still, I'm not sure he comprehended that the runner had been forced out when he threw back to third. I was coaching 1b and was watching the play at home so didn't see what the "out" runner was doing. When the throw was made to third, our runner was maybe 15' from third and not running hard (I'm sure he knew he was out and was just trotting off the field -- but still in the base path). It was only after the third baseman got the ball and went to tag him that he tried to avoid it (knowing him, he figured if the defense wasn't sure he was out, maybe the umpires would be confused too -- still, that pickle lasted 0.2 seconds). At the time of the throw to third, the other runners were standing on second and about 6'-8' off first, so there really wasn't any other play to be made.
 

Rous

Addicted to Softballfans
Unless the umpire judges the retired runner was attempting to draw a throw, it is nothing.

The umpire didn't quite say it that way. He said that because the catcher made a throw thinking the runner was not retired, then it was interference. He did not say that he had judged the runner's intent. But is it true that there also has to be an alternative play to be made?
 

Hiltz

Built for comfort
I can't comment on the ruling, but if I'm involved in a situation like this as a player and I get forced out with additional runners running the bases, I always peel off the basepath into the grass. Take myself completely out of the play to avoid this fiasco.
 

jbo911

Super Moderator
Staff member
If a retired runner or a runner who has scored causes interference, the runner closest to home is called out. Continuing to run and drawing a throw is considered interference.

Now, two things about this. First, for it to be interference, there has to be a play available that the defense could’ve made. If everyone else was standing on their bases at the instant of the throw, then there wasn’t an out to be gained, and there can be no interference.

Second, it’s umpire’s judgment as to whether it looked like the runner was continuing to run the bases. Sometimes, the defense just needs to be a little more aware of the situation. However, from your description, it sounds like he was continuing to run. Was the runner close to the base line between second and third? Did it look like he was running fast? All of these things matter.
Just to make sure I understand this, if I'm running to third in this scenario, and the 3b missed the bag, but I'm called out on proximity, and I go and stand on the bag to make sure I heard the Ump right, he could call out another player? If I don't hear him call out or safe, and I stand on third he could call out another runner?

Surely the rule states that this should be an intentional attempt to confuse the defense like a fake tag or something. I hope it says to be very conservative in making this call.
 

Joker

Well-Known Member
as usual jbo twists words around, doesn't read, or is just too stupid to understand. there needs to be another play that the putout runner caused to be missed for there to be interference. read the 2nd line dip****
 

Rous

Addicted to Softballfans
Just to make sure I understand this, if I'm running to third in this scenario, and the 3b missed the bag, but I'm called out on proximity, and I go and stand on the bag to make sure I heard the Ump right, he could call out another player? If I don't hear him call out or safe, and I stand on third he could call out another runner?

Surely the rule states that this should be an intentional attempt to confuse the defense like a fake tag or something. I hope it says to be very conservative in making this call.

Agreed. In this case, third baseman clearly stepped on third, but the runner slowed to a trot and was still 15' from third when the third baseman caught the ball from the catcher. I'd have never thought, once out, that I need to abandon the base path asap so as not to be seen as trying to deceive the defense.
 

Rous

Addicted to Softballfans
As a retired base runner headed from 2nd to 3rd, I am probably not looking at the batter/runner to see if he has taken a wide turn at first and my presence trotting into third could force the catcher to throw back to third instead of making a throw to first base. It does indeed sound like you could unintentionally cause interference.

In my case last week, I am convinced that the ump missed the second part of the rule as the two base runners were on or in close proximity to first and second base. Being right didn't help us (and at the time I did not know the right argument -- not that I think it would have changed Red's mind).
 

jbo911

Super Moderator
Staff member
Just ignore joker. For some reason he thinks calling people stupid makes him look smart, and he accuses anyone of twisting words when he's not smart enough to keep up. The bright side is he's really stupid and even worse at softball so he can only rile up noobs now. Everyone else finally started ignoring him.

It doesn't take a genius to understand my point, and as your scenario as the op shows, your ump clearly called this when there wasn't another play to make. I primarily wanted the real umps, not joker, to comment on whether they were instructed to be conservative making this call.
 

NCASAUmp

Un-Retired
Just ignore joker. For some reason he thinks calling people stupid makes him look smart, and he accuses anyone of twisting words when he's not smart enough to keep up. The bright side is he's really stupid and even worse at softball so he can only rile up noobs now. Everyone else finally started ignoring him.

It doesn't take a genius to understand my point, and as your scenario as the op shows, your ump clearly called this when there wasn't another play to make. I primarily wanted the real umps, not joker, to comment on whether they were instructed to be conservative making this call.

Say what you want about Joker, he doesn’t mess around in this section of the forum.

To answer your question, if you’re called out, you’re out. Doesn’t matter if it was a bad call or not.

Now, if the officials change their ruling because of the pulled foot, then you’d be placed on third, even if you’re already sitting on the bench in the dugout. The changed call put you in jeopardy, which can easily be rectified by the plate umpire.
 

jbo911

Super Moderator
Staff member
Say what you want about Joker, he doesn’t mess around in this section of the forum.

To answer your question, if you’re called out, you’re out. Doesn’t matter if it was a bad call or not.

Now, if the officials change their ruling because of the pulled foot, then you’d be placed on third, even if you’re already sitting on the bench in the dugout. The changed call put you in jeopardy, which can easily be rectified by the plate umpire.
Doesn't mess around, you mean he insults everyone he can all the time? Sounds like every other section too.
 

Rous

Addicted to Softballfans
I talked to the ump the other night before our game (didn't play on July 3).

He remembered the play, said our runner had slowed after force out, but then sped up again forcing the catcher to throw (I didn't see that and I never asked if he wasn't sure he was out or if he was just being a jack***). The ump agreed that our other base runners were standing at first and second and there was no other play to be made. He insisted (and another ump standing there agreed) that just forcing the throw, even when no other play to be made, was sufficient to constitute interference.

According to the ump, if you, even mistakenly, cause a throw, interference can be called, but it is up to the ump to decide if you were looking like a baserunner. He said our guy was find if he had just slowed down after being forced out and didn't pick up speed again.

Rule 8-5f. seems to support the umpire's explanation.

Rule 8. Baserunning
Sec. 5. B-E. It is a dead ball immediately and the involved base runner is out.
F. When a base runner who has been put out continues to run the bases, thus simulating a live base runner, and thereby draws a throw to retire him a second time.
The infraction constitutes INTERFERENCE. All play stops; the ball is dead, and the MOST ADVANCED RUNNER IS CALLED OUT
 

NCASAUmp

Un-Retired
Rule 8. Baserunning
Sec. 5. B-E. It is a dead ball immediately and the involved base runner is out.
F. When a base runner who has been put out continues to run the bases, thus simulating a live base runner, and thereby draws a throw to retire him a second time.
The infraction constitutes INTERFERENCE. All play stops; the ball is dead, and the MOST ADVANCED RUNNER IS CALLED OUT

Just reading this on the surface would certainly lend support to the umpire's statement. Barring any other clarifications or case plays from USSSA that would contradict this, I'd have to say that for USSSA, he made the correct call.

For USA Softball, there would have to be a play available at the time of the infraction. If runners are on their bases and going nowhere, then there is no interference.
 

sprtfan

Addicted to Softballfans
Just reading this on the surface would certainly lend support to the umpire's statement. Barring any other clarifications or case plays from USSSA that would contradict this, I'd have to say that for USSSA, he made the correct call.

For USA Softball, there would have to be a play available at the time of the infraction. If runners are on their bases and going nowhere, then there is no interference.

What would be the call in the same situation in USA softball if there was no play to be made but the runner that was out was simulating a live base runner and the catchers throw was air mailed into LF? Would the runner on 2nd be able to advance? Thanks
 

jbo911

Super Moderator
Staff member
don't say stupid **** and you won't get called stupid
You're the idiot as usual. Obviously there was anther play to be made In the scenario we're discussing. I said make another out call. How do you make another call out without another play to be made?
 
Top