Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve
How do you figure that the "discarded"  (i.e., THROWN, as I've never seen a batter gently lay his bat down to "discard" it, and I can safely ascertain that the OP meant "thrown") bat didn't hinder the catcher? It knocked the ball a couple of feet farther away from the catcher, who then had to rush his throw as a result. Perhaps there needs to be intent, but from subsequent info provided, it appears that this coach has his players intentionally interfere on a regular basis, so there's a good possibility that the hindrance of the catcher was intentional. |
You read between the lines too much. Discarded does not mean thrown. The op did not say catcher had a problem or rushed his throw. Subsequent info was not in evidence for the original op, or the ump who had to rule. PU must rule on what he saw, not what he found out later. If he saw it as intentional then INT. If the discard contact was not intentional in his view, then no INT. If you do not factor intent you penalize offense for defensive mistake, remember wild pitch.
I have seen a lot of discarded bats after a 3rd strike swing at a pitch in the dirt that were not thrown at a loose wild pitch.