The Umpire Bible website presents an interference scenario that is brought up under the base runner "confusing" an infielder:

You can think up lots of scenarios. For example, let's say there's one out and a runner on first (R1). Batter hits a weak grounder to the shortstop. Easy double-play, right? Well, on sliding into second, R1 shouts "that's three outs," and the second baseman pulls up, drops the ball and starts heading for the dugout. Well, you might say the second baseman (F4) is a moron for not knowing his situation and falling for the trick (and you'd be right). That said, it's still interference.

I understand what's being said by this, but does this situation call for the batter-runner to be out, making for a double play, rather than putting out the base runner committing the act (since it seems like he's already been forced out, per the description of the play)?

1 Answer 1


Yes, although R1 interfered, he interfered in the process of getting the batter out. It would be the same as a base coach or bench player interfering on behalf of the batter; the batter is out.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.