Runner Interference not called. Spectator Discussion

That is correct no interference looks like 2 nd baseman called him off. Umpire must determine who is playing the ball.

First... There is no interference on the R2 since the 2nd baseman was able to make a play on the ball. The rule interference only protects one fielder that is able to make a play on the ball and that was the 2nd baseman since he was the closest and made the out. 2nd.. So since the SS cant be interfered here since he didnt make the actual play you can actually get him for obstruction on the runner.

Only one fielder can be protected. I would not protect the SS in this situation since he was called off the play by his teammate, who then dropped the ball. Since the fielder is not protected, I have nothing. Results of the play stand.

The short stop over ran the ball and was out of the play after he crossed 2n towards right field.

Field umpire appeared to have his back turned to the possible interference incident and likely couldn't have seen it. If he did see it, he'd have to make a judgment on who the protected fielder was. It didn't look like the shortstop was going to make the play regardless. So I'd say it was a good non-call. However, if he did call the interference, I'm thinking he could have sold it. On another note, why was he giving the infield fly signal?

The SS and 2B made the decision as to who was protected. As soon as the ball was hit F4 began moving towards the spot where he eventually caught the ball. F6 began moving parallel to the baseline. F6 would have had to have been a superhero to make a play on that ball. F6 gets no love on this one.

Title of video is a bit misleading. It's only "Runner Interference not called." if there was runner interference, and it was not called during the game. Should it have been called? Debatable. Which is why this is a great video.

So this is a really tough call alot of factors. To me it looks like the runner was timing up with the fielder and gave way at the last second if so and the umpire wanted to make this case then it's interference, however we have three fielders that is converging on the ball so an interference call is a really hard sell on this either way this play went the umpire was right.

The outfield view was the best view. I got nothing here everyone is doing what they're supposed to be doing

I'm not sure what the right mechanic is (watch ball or watch fielders/runners), but the base umpire didn't even see the contact since he was watching the ball. Can't call what you don't see.

No interference here at all. Shortstop did not even appear to be going after the ball at all until after the contact was made.

Is that you on the video (as a fan) yelling out to the umpire what the call should have been?

As others have said, who did the umpire protect - based upon the ruling it wasn't the short stop. One could make a (weak) counter argument this was obstruction, since he wasn't the fielder being protected. A "no call" was the best option here.

Can only protect 1 defensive player and I’m assuming he protected the one that made the catch (kind of easy to do that once you don’t call interference).
You will have to talk to a coach 99% of the time regardless of how you call it.
I’m good either way.

Good no call. Looks as if the SS was actually trying to rub the runner. Took a terrible angle to the ball to sell his protection.

Pausing and commenting…I have no problem on the no call. I watched it 4 times and the interference (at least from this view) is not obvious. I can’t tell if they collided. Also, just as an editorial, the SS didn’t appear like he was really going after that ball. Now to continue watching …

The SS had a viable play on the ball, so Interference should've been called and the "scoring runner" returned to 3rd base.

It's a tough call who to protect. The ball dropped on the SS side of second base and SS was playing MUCH closer to the base than the second baseman, so SS had a shorter run to the ball. The best fielder to make that play was probably actually CF since it was reasonably close to him and he had the ball in front of him but, as we know, infielders like to go out for anything they can reach.

I don't have interference here. Now I don't have my NFHS rulebook on me, but from what I understand, interference is called if the runner hinders a fielder from making a play on the ball. I do not have the shortstop as the protected fielder, I have the 2nd basemen as the protected fielder, not the shortstop. Therefore, this is nothing. Now IF U1 had made an interference call (or PU), then sure there is an argument to be made for interference (though not a very strong argument). However, in my judgement I do not have anything, no interference, no obstruction, nothing. This is simply just one of those wacky plays that looks messy at first glance. From the 2nd angle we get, that only furthers my point.

Only one fielder is protected on the play. That's the judgement call. SS was not camped under it when contact occurred and CF and 2B had better bead on it.

Mmmm that's very iffy in my estimation. I wouldn't have called it either

Only one fielder can be the protected fielder. You have multiple fielders moving towards the ball. The umpire must decide which one is protected. Now I don't know that the umpire actually saw the contact or not, but regardless it appears that the shortstop gave way to the outfielder that called him off. That would probably be enough to state that the shortstop was not the protected fielder, so no interference. The fact that the second baseman eventually came up with it doesn't really matter. It was probably the centerfielder's play most likely, but sometimes baseball goes that way. I believe the umpire COULD have made a case for interference, if he had decided that the shortstop was the protected fielder.

I wonder who that spectator was yelling at the ump about the kid having to go back. 🤔

What has me confused on this play is why the field umpire is giving the infield fly rule sign when there is no one on 1st base. He clearly raises his right hand and points upward.

I have F4 as the protected fielder. F6 wasn't even going to where the ball was. Maybe obstruction on him? Anyway, I couldn't see any hindering in both sides, and I wouldn't call obstruction also, that, if called, it wouldn't change anything. If the fans were right? They almost never are.

The umpire also didnt see the contact at all or what the 2 were doing. So really plate umpire would have to make this call. It looks to me that the SSs angle to the ball before contact was off and he likely wasnt going to make this play, so im inclined to say 2b was the primary fielder as well which makes this no interference. Tough call either way.

Agree. But I'd love to know what U2 told the coach.

The commenters are incorrect. The umpire must make a judgement as to which fielder is making a play on the hit ball. The 2nd baseman appears to be the primary fielder, thus incidental contact (if there was any) does not come into play with the SS. The fact that the SS gave up on the play makes it easy for the umpire to conclude the 2B fielder was the primary fielder. In my judgement the play should stand as called