It really was a triple play

by Reverend Jim Ignatowski on Apr 20, 2007 10:04 PM CDT

Rule 6.06 The Batter
A batter is out for illegal action when --
a) He hits a ball with one or both feet on the ground entirely outside the batter's box.
(b) He steps from one batter's box to the other while the pitcher is in position ready to pitch;
(c) He interferes with the catcher's fielding or throwing by stepping out of the batter's box or making any other movement that hinders the catcher's play at home base. EXCEPTION: Batter is not out if any runner attempting to advance is put out, or if runner trying to score is called out for batter's interference.
Rule 6.06(c) Comment: If, however, the catcher makes a play and the runner attempting to advance is put out, it is to be assumed there was no actual interference and that runner is out--not the batter. Any other runners on the base at the time may advance as the ruling is that there is no actual interference if a runner is retired. In that case play proceeds just as if no violation had been called.

So there was no interference. Force at second, tagged out at third and throw to first for the putout.

How about that sports fans.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation, Bleed Cubbie Blue, or Al Yellon, editor-in-chief. FanPost opinions are, however, valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.

0 recs | Comment 13 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

blanco started towards first, then...

backed into molina=interference (as the umps called it). then molina tagged blanco, meaning there was no force out at 2nd. double play at best.

I don't care about a world series, just be competitive thru September.

by buckmulligan on Apr 20, 2007 10:13 PM CDT 0 recs

Sorry

You beat my post by 1 minute.

by sandbergformanager on Apr 20, 2007 10:15 PM CDT up 0 recs

Both of you are wrong...

...there was no tag at home so the force was on. Force at second, tag at third and throw out at first. Triple play.

El Jefe

by Reverend Jim Ignatowski on Apr 22, 2007 1:25 PM CDT up 0 recs

there was a tag

what were you looking at. molina facegrabs henry, ball drops to the ground. molina picks it up, tags henry, throws to second. look again. i'm going to go look at youtube for it. plain as the nose on your face you know.

I don't care about a world series, just be competitive thru September.

by buckmulligan on Apr 22, 2007 9:31 PM CDT up 0 recs

Wrong

Molina tagged Blanco out then threw to second where there was no force out anymore so Jones was safe, however DeRosa was out at third by being tagged, and the throw to first by Rolen meant nothing. Should have been a double play with a man on second.

by sandbergformanager on Apr 20, 2007 10:14 PM CDT 0 recs

Exactly

Regardless of interference or Molina tagging Blanco out....there was no force at second base, so a double play would have been all they could have gotten.

"I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day." ~ Frank Sinatra

by Addison7 on Apr 21, 2007 11:51 AM CDT up 0 recs

What the heck was Blanco doing up there?

I know he isn't the greatest offensive player in the world, but he is usually pretty fundamentally sound. He looked lost up there at the plate on that play. He looked at one right down the middle trying to bunt and then popped one straight up. He looked absolutely clueless. Get that bat out of his hands!

He said Poo Holes.

by madog93 on Apr 21, 2007 7:52 AM CDT 0 recs

Yeah, Jim

you ass and your rules, how dare you, fans know so much more than umpires.

(Please please note the sarcasm)

Faith Plus One - Contributing Editor -http://www.inaleagueofherown.com

by Faith plus 1 on Apr 21, 2007 11:57 AM CDT 0 recs

Wrong

I used to umpire high school ball, which means I know about 10% of what the pro guys do, but a lot more than the average fan. The umpires ruled that Blanco interfered with the catcher. Interference results in an immediate dead ball and in this case Blanco being called out. If you watched the replay you could clearly see the 2nd base ump with his hands in the air signalling that the play was dead as he evidently saw it as interference immediately. Major league umpires might miss an occasional safe/out, ball/strike call, but virtually never incorrectly interpret a rule.

by qccub on Apr 22, 2007 1:47 AM CDT 0 recs

Re

Unfortunately, the umps did botch this play. Since one of the things that controls whether or not interference occurred is the outcome of the play, the umps have to let it unfold to its conclusion. Moreover, that actually happened in spite of an ump's attempt to prevent it.

Since the runner going to third was out regardless of anything else, since he was tagged, the rule, by definition, says no interference occurred. All that's left, then, is to sort out the scoring, which should have been a double-play with a runner left on second.

Visit The Digital Gazette

by Jed Taylor on Apr 22, 2007 2:52 AM CDT up 0 recs

Not correct

If you have obstruction, you let the play continue to its conclusion. Not so with interference.

by qccub on Apr 22, 2007 9:58 PM CDT up 0 recs

"Never incorrectly interpret a rule"

I suppose they weren't technically "interpreting" anything, but an umpire earlier this week also blew calling Izturis out on his squeeze bunt for stepping out of the batters' box.

Baby, you got a stew goin'

by Thelonious on Apr 22, 2007 3:33 AM CDT up 0 recs