We only can have an interference out if the batter is 'actively hindering the catcher while in the batter's box' (ASA 7.6.Q) or if the batter prevented the pitched ball from entering the strike zone (ASA 7.4.M) with 2 strikes on the batter.
We can only have the interference call (hindering) if there is a possible play. In my mind, someone would have to be stealing or a runner would have to be an undeniably dead duck (fell down in between bases). Without the potential for a play, I don't think I would rule interference.
Since the interference would not be interference until the batter touched the ball, and since the strike call for preventing a pitch to enter the strike zone would happen simultaneously, I think we could correctly rule that we could have (if there are 2 strikes) a strike out on the batter and an interference call to take out the runner closest to home (ASA 8.7.P). Or, with less than 2 strikes, interference on the batter, batter is out and return runners back to bases at TOP.
__________________
Mark
NFHS, NCAA, NAFA
"If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?" Anton Chigurh - "No Country for Old Men"
|