Mookieference Call in ALCS Game 4

[Fred in Lynn]

I don’t think it’s true that fan interference can’t apply when a player reaches into the stands. If a player reaches into the stands and a fan punches him the face (the players‘ s face being in the field of play) it would be fan interference the way I read the rule.

Why not? West apparently determined that a fan (or fans) touched Betts in the field of play and that the contact prevented Betts from fielding the ball. Maybe I’m not understanding you, but it seems to me that it exactly applies.

To each paragraph:

1) Well, it would certainly be assault.

Read the second paragraph of the Rule 6.01(e) Comment: No interference shall be allowed when a fielder reaches over a fence, railing, rope or into a stand to catch a ball. He does so at his own risk. However, should a spectator reach out on the playing field side of such fence, railing or rope, and plainly prevent the fielder from catching the ball, then the batsman should be called out for the spectator’s interference.

I see what you’re getting at, but don’t see an exception in that section. Maybe that would be a scenario addressed in a different area of the rule book, since that’s not even interference anymore (it’s a criminal act). The way I interpret your post, I think you’re just trying to use an extreme example to make a point. So, I’ll ask what I think you might be trying to ask - What if the fans weren’t committing a criminal act (ha ha) and weren’t just going for the ball but doing something in between, like trying to pull his hands down or tackle him? I think the reading of the rule suggests that would be too bad for the fielder (“he does so [enters the stands] at his own risk”).

2) The reason I don’t think it applies is because West ruled Mookie did not reach into the stands. Interference can be called. I think we’re just misunderstanding each other’s meaning.

 

[dhappy42]

To each paragraph:

1) Well, it would certainly be assault.

Read the second paragraph of the Rule 6.01(e) Comment: No interference shall be allowed when a fielder reaches over a fence, railing, rope or into a stand to catch a ball. He does so at his own risk. However, should a spectator reach out on the playing field side of such fence, railing or rope, and plainly prevent the fielder from catching the ball, then the batsman should be called out for the spectator’s interference.

I see what you’re getting at, but don’t see an exception in that section.

I’m talking about the bolded part. If a spectator reaches into the field of play and plainly prevents a fielder from catching the ball, then the batsman should be called out for the spectator’s interference” even if some part of the fielder’s body (usually a hand and arm) has extended into the stands.

If the spectator touches the part of the player that is in the stands (but not the player in the field) then no interference.

The point I’m making (or belaboring) is that just because a player extends his glove into the stands, it doesn’t mean fan interference can’t be called. If the fan reaches into the field, it can be.

The way I interpret your post, I think you’re just trying to use an extreme example to make a point.

Right. Bad example. Instead of punching the player, substitute push or touch.

So, I’ll ask what I think you might be trying to ask - What if the fans weren’t committing a criminal act (ha ha) and weren’t just going for the ball but doing something in between, like trying to pull his hands down or tackle him? I think the reading of the rule suggests that would be too bad for the fielder (“he does so [enters the stands] at his own risk”).

That’s the part where we disagree. I don’t think the rule gives spectators carte blanche to reach into the field of play and touch, grab, push, etc players when a player reaches into into the stands. If the contact between player and fan occurs in the stands, no interference. If the contact occurs in the field, then it can be interference, regardless of whether some part of the player is in the stands.

So back to our Game 4 scenario. If Betts’ glove had crossed the plane, fans can touch it without interfering. But if a fan crosses the plane in the other direction and inhibits the player, then interference can be called, even if the player crossed the plane too.

2) The reason I don’t think it applies is because West ruled Mookie did not reach into the stands. Interference can be called. I think we’re just misunderstanding each other’s meaning.

Ok. I misunderstood you.

 

[timlinin8th]

2) I believe this is a home run. The ball is still live even after the catch unless and until time out is called and since the touching of the ball occurs in the fan's side of the boundary I think this is a home run. But I think your point is actually a good one and is the reason that this one is tough. A batter is out if the ball is caught. Catching the ball means securing possession with enough time to take an act that would constitute voluntary release. This one is a cluster fuck. I have no idea.

I disagree on it being a home run. Once the catch is secured, the out is recorded. Yes, the ball is still live and then baserunners may tag up and proceed to run at their discretion - until the fan touches the ball, which causes the play to go dead. It won’t be fan interference as the ball is outside the field of play but the play stops as soon as the fan contacts the ball, meaning baserunners can’t run and can’t be placed by umpires due to the fan contact. Sequence of events matters in baseball. Of course this interpretation is just IMO, I have never been a professional umpire nor played one on TV.

My attempts on the others:

1) Again, once the ball is caught the out is recorded with the ball still being live until fan interference is called on the drop. Umpires get to rule on baserunners in this scenario due to the interference in the field of play (odds are, baserunners are simply sent back to their original bases though bases COULD be awarded).

3) Same as #2 which I already commented on - out is recorded on the catch, dead ball due to fan contact after.

4) Fan interference, dead ball and umpires rule the play. Since the fielder had no shot at recording the out there will be no out awarded, baserunners are placed accordingly.

5) Fan interference occurs first. Dead ball BUT umpires have the discretion to allow the catch that occurs after to stand IF they feel the interference did not assist in the catch being made. Baserunners are placed accordingly.