Jeffers' Runner's Lane Interference No-Call Highlights Difference in RLI Rules by Level of Play

When HP Umpire Tom Hallion no-called Twins batter-runner Ryan Jeffer's potential runner's lane interference play in Texas, we were asked why Jeffers, who failed to run within the runner's lane, was not declared out. Article: https://www.closecallsports.com/2021/...

The answer is Official Baseball Rule 5.09(a)(11), which states that a batter-runner 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 interferes with the fielder taking the throw at first base, in which case the ball is dead."

The key phrase here is "interferes with the fielder taking the throw at first base" and brings forth a Wendelstedt interpretation that RLI should only be called in cases where the throw "could still reasonably retire the runner" if not for the batter's interaction with the fielder receiving the throw.

In this case, Jeffers is certainly running to the left of the foul line, but Rangers pitcher Mike Foltynewicz's throw could not "reasonably retire" Jeffers. Because Folty threw the ball above Jeffers' head, forcing first baseman Nate Lowe to jump to receive it, pulling Lowe off the bag as Jeffers touched first base, we don't have a reasonable throw. Furthermore, because it appears Lowe was able to catch the ball notwithstanding Jeffers' position, we might not even have an otherwise-illegal interaction between batter-runner and fielder.

In college, by contrast, this WOULD be runner's lane interference because NCAA Rule 7-11-p Approved Ruling 1 states that if the batter-runner running illegally to first base alters the throw of a fielder, that action is enough for an interference call. Because it does appear that Folty's throw was altered because of Jeffers' position, in college, this would be a runner's lane interference candidate.

And in high school, this would result in an out because Jeffers failed to run within the lane as the ball was being fielded to first base (NFHS 8-4-1g). NFHS does not require more of an "interfering" act than simply running illegally as a ball is being fielded to, or thrown to, first base.

How could Texas get an interference call here? If Folty's throw drilled Jeffers in the back, that would be enough for RLI because by drilling Jeffers in the back, it would deprive Lowe—the fielder taking the throw at first base—of the opportunity to receive a throw that might have reasonably retired the runner, if not for the runner's interference.

Finally, we consider the 2019 World Series play (Nationals-Astros) when HP Umpire and Crew Chief Sam Holbrook ruled Trea Turner out for runner's lane interference on a similar play. The difference between the Nats-Stros play and this one, however, was that Turner directly interfered with first baseman Yuli Gurriel taking the throw by virtue of Turner knocking Gurriel's glove off of his hand as he attempted to catch the throw.