I believe you may want to rethink the "'action deemed intentional' is a necessary prerequisite for ANY call of INT on a thrown ball" statement. While that is generally true, my reading of the OBR (6.06(c)) and FED rules (7-3-5-b) as well as the J/R manual, there is no element of intent for the BR when it comes to interfering with the catcher fielding or throwing on a play at the plate. All that is required in both the OBR and FED rules is that the batter steps out of the batters box.
Intent is definitely required of any
RUNNER, but not of the batter in this case.
In terms of who is out under FED rules, the penalty part of 7-3-2 thru 6 states, "For infraction of Art. 5: When there are two outs, the batter is out. When there are not two outs and the runner is advancing to home plate, if the runner is tagged out, the ball remains alive and interference is ignored. Otherwise, the ball is dead and the runner is called out. When an attempt to put out a runner at any other base is unsuccessful, the batter is out and all runners must return to bases occupied at the time of pitch. If the pitch is a third strike and in the umpires judgement interference prevents a possible double play (additional outs) two may be ruled out...."
Under OBR the batter is out in any circumstance and the ball is dead. Unless of course the runner attempting to advance is put out.
(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. If the batter interferes with the catcher, the plate umpire shall call "interference." The batter is out and the ball dead. No player may advance on such interference (offensive interference) and all runners must return to the last base that was, in the judgment of the umpire, legally touched at the time of the interference. 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. If a batter strikes at a ball and misses and swings so hard he carries the bat all the way around and, in the umpire's judgment, unintentionally hits the catcher or the ball in back of him on the backswing before the catcher has securely held the ball, it shall be called a strike only (not interference). The ball will be dead, however, and no runner shall advance on the play.)
So yes, the runner should have been called out and there was no intent necessary. When he left the box and got hit with the catchers throw, he interfered. In FED, under 7-3-5-d, the batter also needs to get out of the way if he has time, with a play at the plate, otherwise he has interfered as well. I don't believe that holds for OBR, atleast I didn't see it in the rules.
With two out, under FED rules, the batter is the one who is out, not the runner.
Quote:
|
Originally posted by cbfoulds
|
Nope, not in this [or any similar situation].
First of all, as I pointed out previously, "action deemed intentional" is a necessary prerequisite for ANY call of INT on a thrown ball, so it cannot be the basis for an additional out. Secondly, even if the pitch was Strike 3, you don't get a "2nd out" on this INT: the "only" out you get on the INT is R3 - B is out on strikes, the dead ball prevents him from advancing on the uncaught 3d strike.
The penalty clause you are reading applies to batter INT w/ a play on any runner EXCEPT R3 coming home w/ less than 2 out: Batter is out for intentional INT w/ play, and IF an [additional] out was actually prevented by the INT - THEN you call another runner out.
Your original post was "half right": the umps rang up the wrong fellow, as you said. But the rest of your post was simply wrong. It is probably not a good idea to be snippy to others [David B] about their understanding of rules when you clearly are shaky on the topic under discussion.
[/B][/QUOTE]