[mikebran]

I haven't heard an answer I really like, yet. And after reading the FED case, wonder if there may not be any difference, really, between the two statutes.

Let's apply some CS&FP to the rules in and cases.

The BALL 4 batter who immediately upon reciept of BALL 4 goes to "toss" his bat in a normal and expected way and is doing exactly what every other batter does, can not/should not be called for interference. The CATCHER has some responsibility to work around this "expected" event.

But the FED CASE is quite different. Here the batter is several steps down the line. AT this time, his tossing of a bat is willfull, not normal, not expected, and it is HE who is at risk. If this happened in a game under ANY rulebook, I would be inclined to call INTERFERENCE on that batter.