Jump to content
Jays Centre
  • Create Account

GDT. 06/18 2015. Mets vs The best team ever. 7.07pm

jays4life19

By jays4life19
in Toronto Blue Jays Talk

 Share

Recommended Posts

Governator Vancouver Canadians

Governator

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted
Nah, it would set a precedent for fans of other teams at road games to do so whenever they could in order to get calls for their team. Do your best to call it as it would have happened, and kick out the fan.

 

Fair point.

  • Replies 546
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

jaysfan2014 Dunedin Blue Jays

jaysfan2014

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
Really insane that they're kicking that guy out... That can't be considered interfering with a ball in play.. he had no way of knowing that would be called fair.

 

MLB rules say fans are to be ejected for interfering with the ball while in play on the field, like we just saw. Not just in Toronto.. it applies to all 30 ballparks.

 

Today, Jeffrey Maier, the guy who caught Jeter's HR away from Tony Tarasco, would be ejected from the ballpark because replay would rule that he interfered with Tarasco when he could've made the play, for example. That didn't exist in 1996..

Jonzo First Round Pick

Jonzo

Verified Member
Posted
Posted
MLB rules say fans are to be ejected for interfering with the ball while in play on the field, like we just saw. Not just in Toronto.. it applies to all 30 ballparks.

 

So if a kid reaches over and grabs the ball, they kick him? Not a chance in hell.

Governator Vancouver Canadians

Governator

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted
MLB rules say fans are to be ejected for interfering with the ball while in play on the field, like we just saw. Not just in Toronto.. it applies to all 30 ballparks.

 

Today, Jeffrey Maier, the guy who caught Jeter's HR away from Tony Tarasco, would be ejected from the ballpark because replay would rule that he interfered with Tarasco when he could've made the play, for example. That didn't exist in 1996..

 

But... there was no fielder within like 100' from this guy. That was not a Bartman play.

Jonzo First Round Pick

Jonzo

Verified Member
Posted
Posted

Ya I just don't buy it sorry.

 

I agree that guy probably didn't get kicked, either spoken to or just moved.

jaysfan2014 Dunedin Blue Jays

jaysfan2014

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
But... there was no fielder within like 100' from this guy. That was not a Barton play.

 

I understand.. but I was trying to explain an example that MLB now frowns on fan interference these days, especially with the introduction of video replay.

Governator Vancouver Canadians

Governator

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted
not to be mean, but it's got to feel weird to pitch with a giant beer cozy on your head.

 

lmao I'm with you. The sweat ring that guy must produce.

o2cui2i Vancouver Canadians

o2cui2i

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted
So if a kid reaches over and grabs the ball, they kick him? Not a chance in hell.

 

they should just put them in a seat at the very back where they can't do it again.

 

 

it could all be stopped by taking out a row of seats at the front in the areas where it is possible to interfere. The seats are way to close to the line down the line.

jaysfan2014 Dunedin Blue Jays

jaysfan2014

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted

For information about fan interference, see rule 3.16 in MLB's official rules:

 

3.16

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 his opinion will nullify the act of interference.

APPROVED RULING: If spectator interference clearly prevents a fielder from catching a fly ball, the umpire shall declare the batter out.

Rule 3.16 Comment: There is a difference between a ball which has been thrown or batted into the stands, touching a spectator thereby being out of play even though it rebounds onto the field and a spectator going onto the field or reaching over, under or through a barrier and touching a ball in play or touching or otherwise interfering with a player. In the latter case it is clearly intentional and shall be dealt with as intentional interference as in Rule 3.15. Batter and runners shall be placed where in the umpire’s judgment they would have been had the interference not occurred.

No interference shall be allowed when a fielder reaches over a fence, railing, rope or into a stand to catch a ball. He does so at his own risk. However, should a spectator reach out on the playing field side of such fence, railing or rope, and plainly prevent the fielder from catching the ball, then the batsman should be called out for the spectator’s interference. Example: Runner on third base, one out and a batter hits a fly ball deep to the outfield (fair or foul). Spectator clearly interferes with the outfielder attempting to catch the fly ball. Umpire calls the batter out for spectator interference. Ball is dead at the time of the call. Umpire decides that because of the distance the ball was hit, the runner on third base would have scored after the catch if the fielder had caught the ball which was interfered with, therefore, the runner is permitted to score. This might not be the case if such fly ball was interfered with a short distance from home plate.

 

Since there was nobody close, it was an obvious double for Reyes.

o2cui2i Vancouver Canadians

o2cui2i

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted
lmao I'm with you. The sweat ring that guy must produce.

 

I have a salt line on my hats if it gets past 20 degrees without straining myself. that thing would fall of my head with all the sweat that would be pouring down.

Governator Vancouver Canadians

Governator

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted
they should just put them in a seat at the very back where they can't do it again.

 

 

it could all be stopped by taking out a row of seats at the front in the areas where it is possible to interfere. The seats are way to close to the line down the line.

 

 

Do you they'd ever consider hockey rink style glass to extend the fences? Sounds retarded I know the thought just popped in my head. I could picture Lawrie diving head first in to the glass.

o2cui2i Vancouver Canadians

o2cui2i

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted
Do you they'd ever consider hockey rink style glass to extend the fences? Sounds retarded I know the thought just popped in my head. I could picture Lawrie diving head first in to the glass.

 

no, glass would suck... one of the biggest plays is a player going over the wall to get a ball. just move the fans back. first seat along the line.... it's like 20 seats they lose on each side. it's a hard one... fan does the right thing and brings a glove and gets excited and of course has no thought of the ball being in play... he just thinks BALL!!!!!!!

BigCecil Vancouver Canadians

BigCecil

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
Harper just left the Nats game with an leg injury..

 

 

Probably just had the ol Mormon magic under garments on a bit tight cutting off circulation

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
The Jays Centre Caretaker Fund
The Jays Centre Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Blue Jays community on the internet.

Become a Caretaker

  • Member Statistics

    20,997
    Total Members
    48,845
    Most Online
    Sarahh
    Newest Member
    Sarahh
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...