Quote:
Originally posted by Thane Yennie
Jim,
So you are saying that the batter by crouching (ducking) is actually in violation and should be called out on interference?
|
Thane,
Not exactly, but almost.
I'm saying that, if a batter crouches to get out of the way, and this crouch does not get him out of the way but instead causes a hindrance on the catcher, and he interferes with the catcher's play, then he has illegally interfered. The most common occurrence that I can imagine would be a batter who ducks, but his bat interferes with the catcher.
You see, the catcher is required to play around the batter. Because of this, the catcher should not have to expect the batter to do anything other than what is natural as a batter.
When the pitch hits the mitt, the catcher chooses a path around the batter at that moment. He has nothing to go on except the batter's natural reaction to the pitch. If the batter then moves, he could potentially move into the catcher's chosen path. This movement can include ducking. That's what the OBR means by, "...any other movement." And that is the recipe for interference.
Reaction to the pitch, and standing still - that's all a batter is allowed to do. If he makes any other movement, and the movement interferes, he is guilty. If he steps out of the box and interferes, he is guilty.