September 29, 2010
Revisiting runner interference
by Rich Marazzi/
Pat Burrell was called safe in Game 1 of the 2008 World Series. (photo: Getty Images)
In my last column I covered the general provisions of the batter-runner interference rule relating to the runner’s box (Pro 6.05-k; NCAA 7-11-p; NFHS 8-4-1-8). In this edition I’ll review several classic plays involving the batter-runner interference rule and the 3-foot wide, 45-foot long runner’s box between home and first base.
Should the batter-runner be called for interference if he has one foot up in the air outside the box and the other foot inside the box and gets hit by a throw, or the ball sails over the batter-runner’s head and in the process he interferes with the fielder at first base taking the throw?
Yes. Interference should be called because the foot that is in the air outside the box is going to come down outside the box. Individual NFHS (high school) state interpreters might not agree that a batter-runner’s foot in the air outside the box constitutes being out of the box but from my research, that is generally the thinking playing under professional rules.
Should batter-runner interference be called in the following scenario? In a 2006 spring-training game played between the Astros and Braves in Kissimmee, Fla., the Braves had a runner on third and one out when Wilson Betemit hit a ground ball to Astros’ first baseman Mike Lamb near the bag. Betemit ran in fair territory on the infield side (outside the box) the entire distance from home to first and forced Lamb to take a step to get a better throwing angle to the plate. Lamb’s throw to catcher Brad Ausmus was late and the Braves scored a run. Should Betemit have been called out for batter-runner interference?
No. Interference should not be called here unless Betemit intentionally interfered with Lamb since the rule only protects the fielder at first base “taking the throw,” not “making the throw.” What Betemit did was smart base running. When a batter-runner runs almost directly at the first baseman who is throwing home, he forces the first baseman to take a step to improve his throwing angle. By doing so, he buys time for the runner on third to score. It should be understood that the batter-runner can virtually run wherever he wants the first 45 feet. If the throw is coming home, the batter-runner can run the entire 90 feet between home and first outside the box.
Tag plays in the area of the box often cause confusion. They should be treated as if there were no runner’s box. The batter-runner, like any other runner, has a three-foot limit on either side (normally the extent of the fielder’s arm) when avoiding a tag attempt whether or not he is in the box. If he escapes the tag and comes out of the box, he is legal as long as he doesn’t exceed the three-foot-rule limit. On tag plays, if the batter-runner never enters the box or straddles the box, it has no bearing on the play. The baseline rule applies the same here as in any other part of the infield. Remember, the batter-runner interference rule is structured to protect the fielder “taking the throw” at first base. Tag plays are a different animal.
In the Red Sox-Tigers game on July 30 at Fenway Park, Tigers catcher Gerald Laird bunted the ball up the first-base line. Kevin Youkilis fielded the ball and attempted to tag Laird. But Laird avoided the tag by running outside the box toward the foul side. Sox skipper Terry Francona argued that Laird violated the baseline rule, meaning that Laird went beyond the three-foot distance allowed when avoiding a tag, but first-base umpire Dan Iassogna disagreed. The argument had nothing to do with Laird running out of the box.
Batter-runner interference is very common but because the enforcement of the rule is erratic, umpires, players and coaches get mixed signals. Let’s look at a few plays.
I have to question why batter-runner interference wasn’t called in the top of the fifth inning of Game 1 of the 2008 World Series played between the Rays and Phillies.
With two out and Ryan Howard on first base, Pat Burrell hit a slow roller between the mound and the first-base line. Rays’ pitcher Scott Kazmir fielded the ball and threw to first baseman Carlos Pena. Pena couldn’t handle the throw and Burrell reached first on Pena’s error.
The replay clearly showed that Burrell ran the last 45 feet between home and first out of the ancient box. Most likely his position obstructed or hindered Pena’s vision by blocking his view of the ball. From this corner, interference should have been called on Burrell based on Pena’s unsure body language when trying to catch the ball. But neither plate umpire Tim Welke nor first-base umpire Kerwin Danley ruled interference. It’s possible the umpires judged that Burrell’s running position did not affect the execution of the play by Kazmir and Pena because they had a good throwing lane.
Perhaps that’s what umpire Shag Crawford was thinking when he failed to call batter-runner interference on the Mets’ J.C. Martin in Game 4 of the 1969 World Series played between the Mets and Orioles. The play is arguably the most controversial one in baseball history involving rule 6.05 (k) since it happened on the big stage of the World Series.
The Mets were batting in the bottom of the 10th inning with the score tied 1-1. Jerry Grote was on second base and Al Weis was on first when Martin bunted the ball toward the first-base line. The ball was fielded by Orioles’ pitcher Pete Richert, who threw to Boog Powell at first base in an attempt to retire Martin. But the ball struck Martin on the wrist and rolled into foul territory. In the process, Grote raced across the plate with the winning run.
The Orioles cried that Martin was running illegally outside the box when struck by the ball. But Crawford, apparently thinking that Richert had a good enough throwing lane to Powell, refused to call Martin out for interference. By the way, Orioles’ skipper Earl Weaver wasn’t around to argue the play because Crawford had ejected him earlier in the game. The Mets went on to win Game 4 and the Series.
To influence the call, it has been a common practice for catchers and pitchers to throw at a batter-runner who is running outside the box the last 45 feet between home and first. Former Orioles’ catcher Elrod Hendricks said, “Several times over the years I purposely drilled runners (the batter-runner) who were running outside the 45-foot lane and often got the interference call. I felt that if he was running outside the lane, he was fair game.”
That might be fine on the big league level because catchers can throw accurately, but on the amateur level I would never encourage a catcher to do that since it can be a dangerous play should the batter-runner get hit in the head with the throw.
The box itself once supported an umpire’s call based on the evidence it created. Former umpire Dale Ford tells this story. “The easiest call I ever made on this rule took place in a California-Texas game in 1987. Scott Fletcher [Rangers], the first batter of the game, bunted the ball and ran inside the line [out of the box]. Bob Boone, the Angels’ catcher, drilled him in the back and I called Fletcher out. There’s no doubt in my mind Boone did it on purpose. Boone is smart.
“Texas manager Bobby Valentine came stormin’ out. There wasn’t one set of footprints in the box as Fletcher led off the game. I said, ‘Bobby, look at this.’ He just turned around and left.”
The defense must make a throw for interference to become a possibility. If a pitcher or catcher eats the ball because they don’t have a clear throwing lane, they should not expect interference to be called.
Because there is no guarantee that interference will be called when a batter-runner is struck by a thrown ball, players on defense should never quit on the play even if a thrown ball should strike the batter-runner. Just ask former Yankees’ second baseman Chuck Knoblauch, who was the goat in Game 2 of the 1998 ALCS played between the Indians and Yankees at Yankee Stadium.
In the top of the 12th inning with the score tied 1-1, the Indians had Enrique Wilson on first base when Travis Fryman pushed a bunt toward Yankees’ first baseman Tino Martinez. Fryman was running on the grass inside the baseline and outside the box the last 45 feet to first base. Martinez fielded the ball and tossed to first base where Knoblauch was covering. The ball hit Fryman in the back as he was about to touch first base or just touched first base.
As the ball rolled several feet beyond the bag, Knoblauch looked at plate umpire Ted Hendry and pointed toward Fryman, pleading the interference call. With the ball alive and moving away from the infield, Knoblauch continued to point as Wilson circled the bases. By the time Knoblauch retrieved the ball, Wilson scored and Fryman advanced to third. The Indians ended up scoring three runs during the frame and won the game, 4-1.
One final comment: There is an exception to the Pro and NCAA rule that prohibits runners from scoring or advancing when batter-runner interference is called. If there is an intervening play at home plate with less than two outs and the batter-runner subsequently interferes with the fielder taking the throw at first base, the run is allowed to score. As stated earlier, the run also would score under NFHS rules without the necessity of an intervening play if the runner from third crossed the plate before the batter-runner was retired at first base and there were less than two outs.
Let’s say Marco Scutaro of the Red Sox pulls off a perfect suicide squeeze with Bill Hall on third. The bunt is fielded by Yankees’ pitcher CC Sabathia, who throws home too late to get Hall. Jorge Posada then fires the ball to first base and Scutaro is called out for running out of the box and interfering with Mark Teixeira, who is taking the throw at first base. With less than two outs the run would score unless the interference was intentional. If there were two outs and Scutaro interfered with the play at first base, the run would not score.
In summary, the batter-runner on all levels will continue to run out of the box by habit, coaching or other reasons. Umpires must be ready to handle this common type of interference. Also, coaches and players should understand the rule about a box that has been with us for 130 years and should lobby for a rule change to make it safer for the fielder taking the throw at first base.
