WPBL Ejection - Hawkins/Perez for...What Exactly?

Valerie Perez made history as the first player ejection in WPBL history as umpire Cody Hawkins ejected the New York Heights SS after an interference call on teammate Keira Izumi vs San Francisco.

With one out and the bases loaded in a 12-0 game with New York leading, Heights batter Claire Eccles hit a ground ball toward second base, where it hit baserunner R1 Izumi's foot before reaching Fireballs 2B Amanda Gianelloni, ruled interference by field umpire Hawkins.

Upon consultation, umpires declared R1 Izumi out and ordered baserunner R2 Perez back to second base, R3 Studer back to third base, and awarded batter-runner Eccles first base on the fielder's choice/interference play.

Hawkins subsequently ejected Perez, who hesitated before ultimately returning to second base while speaking with the umpire.

At the time of the ejection, the Heights were leading, 12-0. The Heights ultimately won the contest, 14-2.

Wrap: San Francisco Firebells vs New York Heights (WPBL), 9/4/26 | Video as follows:

MiLB Ejection on Non-Interference with 2 Outs in 9th

An interference no-call when a runner collided with a fielder attempting to field a batted ball with 2 outs in the 9th allowed Double-A's Senators to tie its game with the Eerie SeaWolves, resulting in ejection and extending the minor league game that was ultimately decided in the 10th inning.

3B Umpire Brandon Spevak ejected SeaWolves manager Tony Cappuccilli for arguing the non-interference call when Senators batter Johnathon Thomas singled on a ground ball past third base. Senators baserunner R2 Maxwell Romero Jr, running into third base, collided with SeaWolves third baseman EJ Exposito, allowing the ball to trickle by while Romero scored and Thomas advanced to second base. At the time of the ejection, the Senators had just tied the game at 2-2. The SeaWolves ultimately won the contest, 3-2, in 10 innings.

The relevant rule is Official Baseball Rule 6.01(a)(10): "Any runner is out when—they fail to avoid a fielder who is attempting to field a batted ball, or intentionally interfere with a thrown ball."

Is there an exception, however, to this rule when a runner is either in contact with or running toward a base?

The answer is no. On a batted ball, the fielder has the right to field it.

At any other time, the runner has the right to run the bases.

Bear in mind, only one fielder is deemed 'protected' during a batted ball, which is an umpire's determination as to which fielder is entitled to field the ball. A non-protected fielder may be guilty of obstruction if they impede the runner.

There is one exception during which the base is a safe space when it comes to questions of batted ball interference: "If a runner is touching their base when touched by an Infield Fly, they are not out, although the batter is out" (OBR 5.07(b)(7)).

Other than that, however, the base is not a safe space and this is interference. Video as follows:

Interference Ends Rockies-Pirates Game as Runner Clips Fielder

An umpire crew's interference call ended a one-run Rockies-Pirates game when Pittsburgh runner R2 Billy Cook ran in front of Colorado 3B Kyle Karros and, in doing so, interfered with the fielder's ability to field the batted ball. Let's take a look.

With two out and the bases loaded in the top of the 9th inning of a game Colorado led 2-1, Pirates batter Jake Mangum hit a 1-2 changeup from Rockies pitcher Jaden Hill on the ground toward 3B Karros, who prepared to field the ball as Pittsburgh baserunner R2 Cook ran by.

Although neither 2B Umpire Tyler Jones nor 3B Umpire Clint Vondrak called interference in real-time, Crew Chief Todd Tichenor convened his crew and, alongside HP Umpire Adam Hamari, exited the brief consultation by ruling baserunner Cook out for interference, resulting in the third and final out of the inning and of the ballgame itself.

Official Baseball Rule 6.01(a)(10) states "it is interference by a batter or a runner when they fail to avoid a fielder who is attempting to field a batted ball." Meanwhile, "obstruction is the act of a fielder who, while not in possession of the ball and not in the act of fielding the ball, impedes the progress of any runner."

Interference on the other hand is defined as follows: "Offensive interference is an act by the team at bat which interferes with, obstructs, impedes, hinders or confuses any fielder attempting to make a play." Note that contact between runner and fielder is not required for interference to be called. All that is needed is an act by the runner that simply impedes or hinders the fielder in their attempt to, in this case, field a batted ball.

From these rules and definitions, we are able to assemble a general baseball axiom.

During a batted ball, the fielder has the right of way to field the ball.

At any other time, the runner has the right of way to run the bases.

In other words, because 3B Karros was attempting to field a batted ball, that means he as the fielder has the right of way. Therefore, illegal interaction with the runner results in an interference call, even if there was no actual contact between the players, although in this case, the runner's left foot appeared to contact the fielder's glove prior to the ball's arrival.

Video as follows:

MLB Ejections 172-3 - Brock Ballou (2-3; ATL x2)

HP Umpire Brock Ballou ejected Braves manager Brian Snitker and 1B Matt Olson (batter-runner interference call; QOCY) in the bottom of the 6th inning of the #Pirates-#Braves game. With none out and none on, Braves batter Olson hit a 3-1 changeup from Pirates pitcher Bubba Chandler on a fly ball into foul territory, whereupon catcher Henry Davis and Olson collided, resulting in an interference call by HP Umpire Ballou. Replays indicate that after hitting the fly ball, batter-runner Olson remained at home plate and failed to avoid catcher Davis as required by rule, and that the tangle-untangle exemption to the interference rule did not apply because Olson did not attempt to run toward first base, the call was correct.* At the time of the ejections, the Pirates were leading, 3-1. The Pirates ultimately won the contest, 3-1.

These are is Brock Ballou (41)'s 2nd and 3rd ejections of 2025.

*Official Baseball Rule 6.01(a)(10): "It is interference by a batter or a runner when they fail to avoid a fielder who is attempting to field a batted ball, or intentionally interfere with a thrown ball, provided that if two or more fielders attempt to field a batted ball, and the runner comes in contact with one or more of them, the umpire shall determine which fielder is entitled to the benefit of this rule."

OBR 6.01(a)(10) Comment on "Armbrister Tangle": "When a catcher and batter-runner going to first base have contact when the catcher is fielding the ball, there is generally no violation and nothing should be called."

These are the 172nd and 173rd ejections of the 2025 MLB regular season.

This is the 90th manager ejection of 2025.

This is the 55th player ejection of 2025. Ejection Tally: 90 Managers, 28 Coaches, 55 Players.

This is Atlanta's 3/4th ejection of 2025, 3rd in the NL East (WAS 10; NYM 5; ATL, MIA 4; PHI 3).

This is Brian Snitker's 3rd ejection of 2025, 1st since August 27 (Mark Wegner; QOC = U [Warnings]).

This is Matt Olson's first career MLB ejection.

This is Brock Ballou's 2/3rd ejection of 2025, 1st since July 7 (Ray Montgomery; QOC = Y [Balls/Strikes]).

Wrap: Pittsburgh Pirates vs Atlanta Braves, 9/27/25 | Video as follows:

Fan Interference AND HR? Blue Jays-Rays Replay Rewind

Rays batter Brandon Lowe's home run stood on review as umpires called both fan interference and a home run on the same play. Blue Jays manager John Schneider met with 3B Umpire Laz Diaz afterward to discuss the unusual ruling, which we now analyze.

With one out and two on in the bottom of the 3rd inning, Rays batter Lowe hit a 2-2 changeup from Blue Jays pitcher José Berríos on a fly ball to deep right-center field. Blue Jays right fielder Nathan Lukes jumped in an attempt to catch the ball, but a fan reached out of the stands and caught the descending fly ball, ruled a home run by 1B Umpire Brian O'Nora.

Upon Replay Review as the result of a Crew Chief initiated-second look (potential home runs are chief reviews), Replay determined that while the fan did definitively commit spectator interference, the home run would ultimately stand because, absent the fan's interference, the ball would have left the yard anyway.

In crafting this ruling, the Replay Official relied on two different rules concerning spectator interference. The analysis thus relies on two different parts.

First, the Official Baseball Rules definition of terms delineates what spectator interference actually is: "Spectator interference occurs when a spectator (or an object thrown by the spectator) hinders a player’s attempt to make a play on a live ball, by going onto the playing field, or reaching out of the stands and over the playing field."

Upon review, Replay HQ in New York determined clear and convincing evidence did exist to declare that spectator interference did occur. To that end, the call on the field of no interference was overturned.

Second, OBR 6.01(e) is triggered only if the spectator interference definition's criteria are satisfied. OBR 6.01(e) states, "When there is spectator interference with any thrown or batted ball, the ball shall be dead at the moment of interference and the umpire shall impose such penalties as in their opinion will nullify the act of interference." An approved ruling allows the umpire to award an out if the fielder would have caught the ball if not for the interference.

This second part of the equation is where Replay Review encountered more difficulty. Because the video angles available were all from press box/behind the home plate area, and no side angle (e.g., parallel to the fence-line) existed, Replay HQ could not definitely determine what would have happened had interference not occurred. In other words, Replay had trouble with the "nullify the act" portion of the rule.

With a lack of clear and convincing evidence to determine how to nullify the act of interference, that leaves with a peculiar ruling of overturn for the interference part of the equation, but call stands for the nullification portion.

Accordingly, the technically correct language and outcome for this play is that the call on the field of no interference was overturned. It was spectator interference, but because of a lack of clear and convincing evidence to suggest what would have occurred absent the fan's illegal involvement, the home run ultimately stands as called.

Video as follows:

Did Runner Interfere So Teammate Could Score?

Chicago trapped Colorado batter-runner Yanquiel Fernández in a rundown as Rockies lead baserunner Warming Bernabel attempted to score. As Cubs second baseman Nico Hoerner received a throw from Michael Busch, BR Fernández collided with him, 2B Umpire Alan Porter ruling an out on the tag, but not interference, the delay from the collision allowing R1 Bernabel additional time to score, with a slide into home plate just ahead of the tag attempt.

Should this have been ruled interference or, because Fernández hadn't yet been tagged until after the initial collision (although he was tagged while being shoved away by Hoerner), does the relevant rule pertaining to a retired runner not apply? For reference that rule is Official Baseball Rule 6.01(a)(5): "Any batter or runner who has just been put out, or any runner who has just scored, hinders or impedes any following play being made on a runner. Such runner shall be declared out for the interference of his teammate."

Video as follows:

Obstruction in Boston as Runner & Catcher Collide on Batted Ball

"Obstruction!" announced umpire Jordan Baker after Guardians batter-runner José Ramírez and Red Sox catcher Connor Wong collided on a batted ball up the first baseline. Instead of an out, Ramírez was awarded first base and Cleveland's Brayan Rocchio scored from third. What's the rule and did Baker's crew get the call right?

With one out and runners on second and third in the top of the 2nd inning of Wednesday's Guardians vs Red Sox game, batter Ramírez hit a check swing ground ball in front of home plate toward first base. Boston catcher Wong initially pursued the batted ball before stopping once he saw pitcher Steven Matz running to field it, turning around to head back to cover home plate as R3 Rocchio raced in.

But as Wong turned toward home, he collided with batter-runner Ramírez. Initially ruled interference on Ramírez, chief Baker called his crew into consultation, ultimately ruling that, because Wong was not entitled to protection under the rules for fielding a batted ball, he therefore obstructed the batter-runner. Accordingly, the batter-runner was awarded first base and all runners advanced one base.

In general, baseball's right-of-way rules give the fielder the right to field a batted ball (meaning the runners must avoid the fielder lest they be guilty of interference) while the runner has the right to run the bases at any other time (the fielder must get out of the runner's way). However, only one fielder is entitled to right-of-way protection on a batted ball and, in this case, that protected fielder was not the pitcher, not the catcher. As such, the unprotected catcher obstructed the runner's right to run the bases.

This is the correct call pursuant to the following rules:

Official Baseball Rule 6.01(a)(10): "It is interference by a batter or a runner when they fail to avoid a fielder who is attempting to field a batted ball, or intentionally interfere with a thrown ball, provided that if two or more fielders attempt to field a batted ball, and the runner comes in contact with one or more of them, the umpire shall determine which fielder is entitled to the benefit of this rule, and shall not declare the runner out for coming in contact with a fielder other than the one the umpire determines to be entitled to field such a ball."

OBR 6.01(h)(1): "If a play is being made on the obstructed runner, or if the batter-runner is obstructed before they touch first base, the ball is dead and all runners shall advance, without liability to be put out, to the bases they would have reached, in the umpire’s judgment, if there had been no obstruction. The obstructed runner shall be awarded at least one base beyond the base they had last legally touched before the obstruction."

Wrap: Cleveland Guardians vs Boston Red Sox, 9/3/25 | Video as follows:

Runner Touched by Fair Ball in Little League - What's the Call?

What happens when a runner is touched by a fair ball? During the Canada vs Aruba Little League World Series game, a baserunner from first base ran into a batted ball after it passed the drawn-in first baseman, but before it got to the second baseman backing up. Umpires, what's the call here?

With one out and one on, a ground ball to the right side eluded Aruba's diving first baseman, without touching him or his glove, before striking baserunner R1 behind him, as the second baseman ranged to his left to potentially back up the play. After initially ruling runner R1 out, umpires ultimately placed R1 on second base, deeming that he did not interfere with the batted ball.

Official Baseball Rule 6.01(a)(11) states it is interference when "A fair ball touches them on fair territory before touching a fielder. If a fair ball goes through, or by, an infielder, and touches a runner immediately back of him, or touches the runner after having been deflected by a fielder, the umpire shall not declare the runner out for being touched by a batted ball. In making such decision the umpire must be convinced that the ball passed through, or by, the fielder, and that no other infielder had the chance to make a play on the ball."

Little League Rule 5.09(f) is nearly identical in outcome: "If a fair ball goes through, or by an infielder and touches a runner immediately back of said infielder or touches a runner after being deflected by an infielder, the ball is in play and the umpire shall not declare the runner out. In making such decision, the umpire must be convinced that the ball passed through, or by, the infielder and that no other infielder had the chance to make a play on the ball; runners advance if forced."

Given that the ball did not make contact with the first baseman, the operative question, thus, is whether or not the second baseman had the chance to make a play on the ball. If he did, then the runner is out. If he did not, then the runner is not out. What's your call?

Video as follows:

MLB Ejection 132 - James Hoye (5; Mike Shildt)

HP Umpire James Hoye ejected Padres manager Mike Shildt (Replay Review decision that overturned Xander Bogaert's HR to fan interference/out; QOCN) in the bottom of the 2nd inning of the #Giants-#Padres game. With none out and none on, Padres batter Xander Bogaerts hit a 3-1 fastball from Giants pitcher Robbie Ray on a fly ball to left field, whereupon outfield Heliot Ramos attempted to catch the fly ball as a fan did as well, ruled a home run by 2B Umpire DJ Reyburn and overturned to fan interference/out upon Replay Review as the result of a Crew Chief Review. Replays do not clearly and convincingly suggest whether or not the spectator reached out of the stands and over the playing field (and in doing so hindered the fielder), the call was incorrect.* At the time of the ejection, the Giants were leading, 4-0. The Giants ultimately won the contest, 4-3.

This is James Hoye (92)'s 5th ejection of 2025.

*The initial call's QOC may very well be Correct; however, the decision to overturn the original ruling was incorrect, for lack of clear and convincing evidence with which to overturn or confirm it.

Official Baseball Rules Definition: "Spectator interference occurs when a spectator (or an object thrown by the spectator) hinders a player’s attempt to make a play on a live ball, by going onto the playing field, or reaching out of the stands and over the playing field."

This is the 132nd ejection of the 2025 MLB regular season.

This is the 71st manager ejection of 2025. Ejection Tally: 71 Managers, 23 Coaches, 38 Players.

This is San Diego's 8th ejection of 2025, 1st in the NL West (SD 8; ARI 5; SF 4; LAD 3; COL 2).

This is Mike Shildt's 2nd ejection of 2025, 1st since July 8 (Brian Walsh; QOC = Y [Balls/Strikes]).

This is James Hoye's 5th ejection of 2025, 1st since July 20 (Tom Mansolino; QOC = U-c [Check Swing]).

Wrap: San Francisco Giants vs San Diego Padres, 8/18/25 | Video as follows:

Phillies Win on Walk-Off Catcher's Interference

A walk-off win due to catcher's interference in Philadelphia left some Boston fans perplexed as Phillies batter Edmundo Sosa's bat made contact with Red Sox catcher Carlos Narváez during a 2-2 pitch, HP Umpire Quinn Wolcott announcing Replay Review's verdict over the stadium PA much to the delight of the home crowd. Because the bases were loaded at the time of the interference, all runners advanced and the tied game ended in the 10th inning.

Catcher's interference is defined more broadly as defensive interference in the Official Baseball Rules: "an act by a fielder that hinders or prevents a batter from hitting a pitch." In high school (NFHS), catcher's interference is called catcher's obstruction, as NFHS defensive interference is specifically an act that occurs prior to the pitch.

OBR 6.01(c) specifies the penalty for catcher's interference: "The batter becomes a runner and is entitled to first base without liability to be put out (provided they advance to and touches first base) when the catcher or any fielder interferes with them."

It is a rules myth that the batter must actually legitimately swing for catcher's interference to be called. For instance, catcher's interference also occurs when a catcher steps on or across home plate prior to the pitch's arrival, whether or not the batter actually swings at the pitch. Instead, catcher's interference occurs when the catcher's physical positioning (of body and/or glove/mitt) deprives the batter of the opportunity to choose whether to swing or not.

Because batter Sosa is said to have been deprived of this freedom of choice by virtue of the bat-mitt contact, the Replay Official overturned the on-field no-call and awarded the interference penalty, resulting in a walk-off win.

Video as follows:

Runner Prevents Double Play by Fielding Ground Ball - Is That Legal?

Have you ever seen a baserunner field a ground ball? During July 1's La Crosse Loggers vs Duluth Huskies game in the Northwoods League, runner R2 Ethan Surowiec sought to prevent a double play on a bases loaded ground ball, opting to field the batted ball in front of La Crosse's waiting shortstop, resulting in a dead ball, with umpires ruling R2 Surowiec out and awarding batter-runner Reagan Reeder first base (the official scoring put this as a fielder's choice, but by rule this application would be credited as a single for the batter).

But was this the correct call?

This precise scenario is covered by Official Baseball Rule 6.01(a)(6): "If, in the judgment of the umpire, a base runner willfully and deliberately interferes with a batted ball or a fielder in the act of fielding a batted ball with the obvious intent to break up a double play, the ball is dead. The umpire shall call the runner out for interference and also call out the batter-runner because of the action of their teammate. In no event may bases be run or runs scored because of such action by a runner."

College's rule is even stricter, not requiring "obvious intent" but simply intentional interference: "If a double play is likely, and the runner intentionally interferes with the fielder who is attempting to field or throw the ball, both the runner and batter-runner shall be declared out" (NCAA 8-5-d).

High school returns to OBR's "obvious" standard: "The batter-runner is out when any runner or retired runner interferes (2-21-1, 2-30-3) in a way which obviously hinders an obvious double play" (NFHS 8-4-1h).

In sum, this very likely should have been ruled a double play. | Video as follows:

MLB Ejection 067 - Stu Scheurwater (1; Craig Counsell)

HP Umpire Stu Scheurwater ejected Cubs manager Craig Counsell (runner's lane interference no-call on Otto Kemp; QOCY) in the bottom of the 9th inning of the #Cubs-#Phillies game. With none out and none on, Phillies batter Kemp hit a 0-0 fastball from Cubs pitcher Brad Keller on the ground to catcher Carson Kelly, who threw to first baseman Michael Busch after Kemp arrived at first base, ruled safe by 1B Umpire Vic Carapazza and non-runner's lane interference by HP Umpire Scheurwater. Replays indicate that although batter-runner Kemp failed to run within the running lane (plus fair territory dirt extension adopted by MLB in 2024) by virtue of running on the grass, his doing so did not interfere with fielder Busch receiving the throw at first base, as the throw could not have reasonably retired the runner. At the time of the ejection, the game was tied, 2-2. The Phillies ultimately won the contest, 4-3, in 11 innings.

  

This is Stu Scheurwater (85)'s 1st ejection of 2025.

*Official Baseball Rule 5.09(a)(11): "The batter is out when in running the last half of the distance from home base to first base, while the ball is being fielded to first base, they run outside (to the right of) the three-foot line, or inside (to the left of) the foul line, and in the umpire’s judgment in so doing interfere with the fielder taking the throw at first base, in which case the ball is dead."

This is the 67th ejection report of the 2025 MLB regular season.

This is the 34th manager ejection of 2025. Ejection Tally: 34 Managers, 13 Coaches, 20 Players.

This is Chicago's 4th ejection of 2025, 1st in the NL Central (CHC, PIT 4; CIN, STL 3; MIL 2).

This is Craig Counsell's 2nd ejection of 2025, 1st since June 8 (Derek Thomas; QOC = Y [Balls/Strikes]).

This is Stu Scheurwater's 1st ejection since August 12, 2024 (Oliver Marmol; QOC = Y [Balls/Strikes]).

Wrap: Chicago Cubs vs Philadelphia Phillies, 6/9/25 | Video as follows:

MLB Ejections 060-1 - Chad Fairchild (1-2; MIA x2)

HP Umpire Chad Fairchild ejected Marlins 2B Xavier Edwards and manager Clayton McCullough (runner's lane interference call; QOCN) in the top of the 3rd inning of the #Marlins-#Rays game. With none out and one on, Marlins batter Edwards bunted a 0-0 fastball from Rays pitcher Zack Littell on the ground to Littell, who threw to first baseman Jonathan Aranda as batter-runner Edwards arrived at first base, resulting in a collision between Edwards and Aranda as the ball caromed into right field, ruled runner's lane interference by HP Umpire Fairchild. Replays indicate the batter-runner may have run outside of the expanded runner's lane (e.g., on the infield grass), but that the pitcher's low throw could not have reasonably retired the runner, the call was incorrect.* At the time of the ejection, the Rays were leading, 1-0. The Rays ultimately won the contest, 4-3.

 

These are Chad Fairchild (4)'s 1st and 2nd ejections of 2025.

*Official Baseball Rule 5.09(a)(11): "The batter is out when in running the last half of the distance from home base to first base, while the ball is being fielded to first base, they run outside (to the right of) the three-foot line, or inside (to the left of) the foul line, and in the umpire’s judgment in so doing interfere with the fielder taking the throw at first base, in which case the ball is dead."

2024 MLB Rules Change: The runner's lane has been expanded to include the dirt in fair territory.

Wendelstedt Umpire Manual Interpretation: "The determination is not whether the throw is true, but whether it could still reasonably retire the runner."

These are the 60th and 61st ejection reports of the 2025 MLB regular season.

This is the 18th player & 31st manager ejection of 2025. Ejection Tally: 31 Managers, 12 Coaches, 18 Players.

This is Miami's 1/2nd ejection of 2025, 1st in the NL East (MIA, WAS 2; PHI 1; ATL, NYM 0).

This is Xavier Edwards' 1st career MLB ejection.

This is Clayton McCullough's 1st career MLB ejection.

This is Chad Fairchild's 1st ejection since July 11, 2024 (Miguel Cairo; QOC = Y [Balls/Strikes]).

Box: Miami Marlins vs Tampa Bay Rays, 6/6/25 | Video as follows:

A Weird Walk-off Win on Base Coach Interference???

Despite umpires calling base coach assist interference, MiLB's Reno Aces walked off the Albuquerque Isotopes when CF Sam Hilliard threw a live ball over the outfield fence, allowing the winning run to score in one of the weirdest come-from-behind wins you'll ever see.

With one out and the bases loaded in the bottom of the 9th inning, visiting and defensive team Albuquerque held a 4-3 lead over offensive team Reno. Reno batter Connor Kaiser hit a 3-2 fastball on a sharp line drive to Albuquerque center fielder Hilliard as Reno baserunner R3 Aramis Garcia scored from third base.

However, as runner R2 Cristian Pache rounded third, he collided with a teammate who had come off the bench to celebrate, and who tried getting Pache reoriented to score after the collision. HP Umpire Steven Hodgins called assist interference on the bench, declaring Cristian Pache out, but because Hodgins used the base coach interference rule (as opposed to actual hinder-or-impede interference for runners and retired/scored teammates), the ball remained live.

Mistakenly thinking the game was already over (perhaps unaware of Pache being ruled out), CF Hilliard then threw the live ball over the fence and out of play, resulting in a dead ball and two base award for trailing runner R1 Andy Weber, who had attained second base (if not third base) by the time of the throw. This meant Weber was awarded home, scoring Reno's 5th run to preserve the wacky walk-off win.

Hodgins ruled Pache out under base coach assist Official Baseball Rule 6.01(a)(8), which states it is interference when "(8) In the judgment of the umpire, the base coach at third base, or first base, by touching or holding the runner, physically assists them in returning to or leaving third base or first base."

This brand of interference is treated differently than the usual runners or retired runners' interference rules, which result in an immediate dead ball. According to Wendelstedt Manual, the ball remains live on base coach assist interference, and the ball remaining live allowed the rest of the play to occur: "Following a coach’s interference, the assisted runner is out, but the ball remains alive. Other runners may make bases or outs" (Wendelstedt p. 159).

The two-base award in OBR 5.06(b)(4)(G): "Each runner including the batter-runner may, without liability to be put out, advance two bases when, with no spectators on the playing field, a thrown ball goes into the stands," is taken at time-of-throw (as opposed to time-of-pitch), so R1's position at the time of the throw (either 2nd or 3rd base) meant that R1 scored as a result of his two-base award.

Video as follows:

Hand Waving Intentional Interference on the Grass

When 2B Umpire Marvin Hudson called interference on Brewers baserunner Jackson Chourio on Christian Yelich's infield ground ball, Milwaukee manager Pat Murphy argued the runner's decision to run on the infield grass is actually legal. Hudson let Murphy have his say, leaving broadcasters to piece together why interference was called...and citing some totally unrelated rules along the way.

With R1 Chourio on first base and one out, batter Yelich hit a ground ball to Cardinals 1B Willson Contreras, who threw to second base to try and force out Chourio. The ball hit Chourio and caromed into left field, drawing an interference call ("Time" and dead ball) by 2B Umpire Hudson.

Official Baseball Rule 5.09(b)(3) states, "Any runner is out when they intentionally interfere with a thrown ball; or hinder a fielder attempting to make a play on a batted ball."

While veering onto the grass on its own generally does not satisfy the intentionality standard of this rule, R1 Chourio's actions in raising his left arm prior to the throw's arrival suggests a proactive attempt to intentionally interfere with the throw.

Thus, R1 Chourio is out not for running on the infield grass or veering, as the broadcaster's incorrectly stated, "out of his baseline" (first, it's a base path not a baseline; and second, the base rule only applies to tag attempts: a thrown ball is not a tag attempt, and therefore the three-foot base path rule does not apply here), but for intentionally interfering with the fielder's throw, as evidenced by his actions in raising his arm prior to the throw's arrival to disrupt the defense's play.

Video as follows:

No, You Can't Hug Manny Machado - Interference at 3B

Hugging Padres 3B Manny Machado turned into an interference-aided double play for Guardians baserunner Gabriel Arias, as 3B Umpire John Bacon ruled that Arias prevented Machado from making a potential play on trailing Cleveland runner Austin Hedges.

With none out and runners on first and second base (R1, R2), Guardians runner R2 Arias took off for third base, drawing a throw from Padres pitcher Kyle Hart to Machado, who waited to tag Arias. But instead of giving himself up, Arias wrapped up Machado, who mimed a fake throw to second base where following runner Hedges was advancing.

Umpire Bacon, ruling that Arias' actions prevented Machado from making a potential play on another runner, ruled now-retired baserunner Arias guilty of interference pursuant to Official Baseball Rule 6.01(a)(5): "Any batter or runner who has just been put out, or any runner who has just scored, hinders or impedes any following play being made on a runner. Such runner shall be declared out for the interference of their teammate."

Broadcasters also erroneously alleged that pitcher Hart balked in making his initial throw to third base, which was unoccupied to begin the play, and without first disengaging the rubber. 

While a pitcher is generally prohibited from throwing to an unoccupied base from the rubber, OBR 6.02(a)(4) makes one key exception that is relevant here: "If there is a runner, or runners, it is a balk when the pitcher, while touching their plate, throws, or feints a throw to an unoccupied base, except for the purpose of making a play."

Because R2 Arias was attempting to advance to third base, Hart's throw to third qualifies for the purpose-of-making-a-play exception to the balk rule and is therefore legal.

Video as follows:

Shohei Ohtani's Home Run or Fan Interference in Tokyo?

Dodgers DH Shohei Ohtani hit a home run in Game 2 of LA's Tokyo Series sweep over Chicago, but not after umpires reviewed the play for spectator interference. Let's take another look at this call stands decision, made due to lack of clear and convincing evidence.

With one out and none on in the top of the 5th inning, Ohtani hit a 2-2 fastball from Cubs pitcher Nate Pearson to deep right-center field, whereupon a fan reached for and touched the baseball, ruled a home run by 2B Umpire John Libka.

Crew Chief Bill Miller initiated a review for spectator interference, defined by the Official Baseball Rules as occurring "when a spectator (or an object thrown by the spectator) hinders a player’s attempt to make a play on a live ball, by going onto the playing field, or reaching out of the stands and over the playing field."

OBR 6.01(e) specifies what to do when spectator interference occurs: "When there is spectator interference with any thrown or batted ball, the ball shall be dead at the moment of interference and the umpire shall impose such penalties as in their opinion will nullify the act of interference."

Replay determined that available camera angles (which themselves suffered from varying degrees of parallax) did not provide clear/convincing evidence to confirm or overturn the call, and thus ruled the original on-field ruling of home run should stand.

Video as follows:

Is Jumping into a Thrown Ball Interference? The Báez Case

Tigers baserunner Javier Báez jumped into a thrown ball following a diving catch by Rays shortstop Carson Williams, resulting in a double play at Grapefruit League Spring Training. With umpires not ruling this interference, instead signaling Báez out only when Tampa retrieved the loose ball and tagged first base, we review baseball's rules to determine whether the runner interfered with the play or not.

Pursuant to Official Baseball Rule 5.09(b)(3), "any runner is out when they intentionally interfere with a thrown ball; or hinder a fielder attempting to make a play on a batted ball."

Replays indicate Báez jumped after Williams began his throw toward first base in an attempt to double up Báez for failing to tag up on the air out, which is indeed interference, as long as the umpire deems the runner's actions were an intentional attempt to hinder or impede the defense from making a play (in this case, completing the throw to first base). Replays indicate 2B Umpire Diaz did not signal interference, which by rule, suggests he did not deem Báez's act as intentional in accordance with OBR 5.09(b)(3).

The definition of offensive interference is "an act by the team at bat which interferes with, obstructs, impedes, hinders or confuses any fielder attempting to make a play."

Video as follows:

Fan Interference in the World Series (Plus a C&C)

We review a first-inning spectator interference play in New York during Game 4 of #Dodgers-#Yankees World Series when a fan was ejected for prying open Mookie Betts' glove during a catch and Alex Verdugo's catch and carry play during Game 1 in Los Angeles.

First, in the 10th inning of Game 1, with one out and runners on first and second base, Yankees outfielder Verdugo ran to catch Dodgers batter Shohei Ohtani's fly ball in foul territory along the left field warning track, catching the baseball before falling into the stands and attempting to throw the ball back to the field to hold the runners.

LF Umpire Chad Fairchild ruled Ohtani out on the catch and awarded runners R1 and R2 one base each pursuant to Official Baseball Rule 5.06(b)(3)(C) pertaining to catch-and-carry situations, which states, "If a fielder, after having made a legal catch, should step or fall into any out-of-play area, the ball is dead and each runner shall advance one base, without liability to be put out, from their last legally touched base at the time the fielder entered such out-of-play area."

Finally, in Game 4 in New York, RF Umpire Mark Carlson called spectator interference when a front-row fan reached over the foul fence as Dodgers outfielder Betts was attempting to catch Gleyber Torres' fly ball. 

For this play, the relevant rules are found in the definitions: "Spectator interference occurs when a spectator (or an object thrown by the spectator) hinders a player’s attempt to make a play on a live ball, by going onto the playing field, or reaching out of the stands and over the playing field," and OBR 6.01(e): "When there is spectator interference with any thrown or batted ball, the ball shall be dead at the moment of interference and the umpire shall impose such penalties as in their opinion will nullify the act of interference."

Thus, to nullify the act, Torres was declared out and the fans ultimately ejected not by the umpires, but by Yankee Stadium security.

Video as follows:

Did Manny Machado Interfere with Freddie Freeman's Throw?

Dodgers 1B Freddie Freeman's throw hit Padres baserunner Manny Machado's back during San Diego's NLDS Game 3 win over LA, but was the runner legal or did Manny commit interference? Umpires ruled the play legal, but analysts were more divided on the play's legality. Let's get into the rulebook and figure out what happened and what the correct call was.

Padres batter Jackson Merrill hit a ground ball to Dodgers first baseman Freeman, whose throw to second base struck Machado in the upper back before caroming into left field, allowing Machado to advance to third base during a six-run rally in the bottom of the 2nd inning. 1B Umpire Dan Bellino and 2B Umpire Tripp Gibson, the two relevant umpires for this play, no-called the sequence, ruling Machado's baserunning legal.

To determine whether Machado interfered or not, we first must cite the relevant rule, which is Official Baseball Rule 6.01(a)(10), which states, "It is interference by a batter or runner when they fail to avoid a fielder who is attempting to field a batted ball, or intentionally interfere with a thrown ball."

Note that we are looking not solely for interference, but intentional interference with a thrown ball. The standard of intentional refers to deliberate action, such as waving of arms, hip check, or looking back after the throw is made and adjusting one's body position into the throw as a result of the look-back. Note that under the intentional standard, non-deliberate interference (e.g., being struck by the ball without any of the aforementioned intentionality indicators) is legal.

Replays indicate Machado began veering to his left prior to Freeman's release of the baseball. With no throw, there can be no OBR 6.01(a)(10) interference, and thus Machado's steps to his left prior to the throw mitigate potential intentional interference.

Two additional considerations from broadcasters and fans are runner's lane interference and out of the base path.

We first discuss the out of the base path issue, noting that the runner shall only be called for running out of the base path when they run more than three feet away from their established base path to avoid a fielder's tag. Since there was no tag attempt, and thus no base path to consider (OBR 5.09(b)(1): "A runner’s base path is established when the tag attempt occurs"), there can be no out of the base path call.

Finally, runner's lane interference, referred to by analyst Alex Rodriguez, does not apply to this play, since OBR 5.09(a)(11) states, in part, "...in the umpire’s judgment in so doing interferes with the fielder taking the throw at first base." The throw was not being made to first base and, furthermore, the runner's lane only exists between home plate and first base. There is no runner's lane between 1B and 2B, thus no RLI call to make.

A similar play occurred in September 2022, when HP Umpire Chad Fairchild no-called Nick Senzel's throw hitting Andrew Knizner in the back during a Reds-Cardinals game.

In conclusion, this is a legal play. | Video as follows: