Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA
The purpose for the "intent" that was once required for INT in the BB was to keep they batter in a certain area. That way the catcher KNEW they had a predetermined throwing lane and did not have to guess which way the batter was going.
However, that is also why there was no "intent" attached to interfering outside of the box.
The possibility that a batter bailing out may give the catcher a clearer throwing path is not consistant enough to rely upon for constant enforcement.
|
There are two rules regarding interference by the Batter that seem to be at odds with each other: 7-6-P and 7-6-R. I don't have my rule book with me, but 7-6-P says something to the effect of interfering with the catcher throwing or catching the ball by stepping out of the batter's box. I may be too analytical and over thinking this but it does appear to me that ASA makes a distinction with "throwing" a ball and a "thrown" ball. One is still in the hands of the fielder and one has left the hand. In most cases, where ASA uses the word "thrown" the interference has to be intentional. See 7-6-R. This makes sense to me because the fielder is responsible for where she throws the ball.
7-6-R says that the batter must intentional interfere with a thrown ball either in or out of the batter's box. So if B2 bails on an inside pitch and is out of the batter's box and see does nothing to intentionally interfere with the thrown ball to 3rd to retire the running stealing on the pitch, I have no interference. ASA did not remove intent from all interference plays. We still have to judge intent in some cases.