rule interpretation

Question
QUESTION:
Please clarify correct ruling for the following and please consider how the ruling changes with slightly different factors:

No outs and no one on base.  The batter hits a fair ball (not very high) pop-up on the right field side, between home and first base, and along the first base line.  The first baseman has a possible play on the ball.  The pitcher has a questionable play on the ball.  The pitcher, while looking up, runs directly into the batter-runner from the side and slightly behind.  Both the batter-runner and the pitcher fall to the ground from the impact.  The first baseman drops the ball and the batter-runner gets up and runs safely to first base.  It is clear the batter-runner could not have seen the pitcher.   And while looking up the pitcher didn't see the batter-runner.

How should this be called?
And considering alternate possibilities:
When would this be considered obstruction?
When would this be considered interference?

If both the first baseman and the pitcher both had a clear play on the ball, does the batter-runner need to consider the pitcher in order to avoid interference even though the pitcher is approaching form somewhat behind the batter-runner and definitely out of the line of sight of the batter-runner?

If the pitcher clearly does not have a play on the ball is this an obstruction?

I guess what I am asking is where is the line between obstruction and interference when there are two "possible" defensive players involved and a collision when the contact is from "somewhat behind" the batter-runner (and clearly out of the line of sight of the batter-runner)?

How "clear" does it have to be whether the pitcher has a play or does not have a play?  Do you consider that the pitcher has a play only if he can make the play with "ordinary effort?"

What needs to take place for either the obstruction or interference call?

Am I making sense?

Thanks in advance for your assistance.

ANSWER: Hi Dale,
 
If the pitcher had no play w/ ordinary effort I would have obstruction.  However if the ball is caught by F3 the obstruction would be canceled and the b-r would be out.  This is only between home and 1st on a caught fly ball.  If the ball was not caught and is fair I would protect the runner to 1st base.

If the pitcher did have a play I would have a difficult time calling interference on the b-r being collided with from the side and behind as they attempt to advance to 1st.  I would probably have nothing on that and let them play on.

Most of what you ask is the umpire's judgment on actually seeing the play

mark

---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: Mark,

Your answer stated that if the pitcher did have a legitimate play (with ordinary effort) and the collision occurred (and it occurred completely out of the sight of the batter-runner, since the pitcher approached from an angle and from behind), and the collision knocked both the batter-runner and the pitch to the ground, that you would let it play out (without indicating interference on the batter-runner).

I can not find anything within the rules which implies an exception to the batter-runner's responsibility to avoid contact (to avoid interference) with a defensive player while making a play on a batted ball (in this manner).

How does this play proceed without an interference call?

When can an umpire elected to make a "non-call?"

Thank you in advance for your response.

Dale

Answer
Hi Dale,

In the thousands and thousands of innings I've umpired I've never seen this happen...where F1 has a legitimate play on a fly ball and runs into the side and rear of a b-r advancing to 1st preventing them from catching the ball.  So I don't want to get too involved in this particular play.

maybe it's happened but...  the contact must almost always been in foul territory which means the ball will fall into ft..  If we have incidental contact here we have no problem on what to do, foul ball.
I have real difficulty seeing contact in fair territory and a fair ball, perhaps we may have interference here but would have to see it.

"I can not find anything within the rules which implies an exception to the batter-runner's responsibility to avoid contact (to avoid interference) with a defensive player while making a play on a batted ball (in this manner)."

"Interference is the act of an offensive player that"......I have no act here by the op, they are simply running to the base.

Interference is a judgment call, our umpire manual tells us that simply because there is a collision does not mean that interference or obstruction has occurred.  Ie a right handed batter laying down a bunt, taking a direct path to 1st and colliding w/the catcher coming forward to field the ball, both are w/in their legal rights and we have incidental contact.

The same applies here in my opinion.  You might see someone add to the answer take a look at their opinions.

Mark