Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder
Depends. IF you have intent, you have interference - I think we all agree on that, and can move to situations where we don't have intent.
Say the batter stepped out to avoid being hit, and they are now out of the box. If, through no additional action or blatant inaction, they are in the way, I don't believe we have interference. However, at some point (your judgement), they have recovered from the avoiding of the pitch and start to bear some responsibility. Once they are aware of what is going on and able to act, they must be out of the play. Not getting out of the way once it is reasonable to expect them to be out of the way puts them at risk.
I will agree that the verbiage is not perfect, and if you slice and dice what I just said, SOMEthing will not perfectly fit within the actual rulebook words as written. But I do believe, from previous threads such as this and comments from clinicians, Mike, Steve, etc, that this is the "jist" of the rules.
|
Today we are starting out agreeing with each other. This is my point exactly. Here's a step by step analysis with the applicable rules being applied.
R1 on 3rd. R2 on 2nd. Inside pitch causing the batter to bail out of the batter's box. The ball gets away from the catcher. The batter has now stepped out of the batter's box but because this act did not interfere with the catcher throwing or catching the ball 7.6-P does not apply. R1 advances home and R2 attempts to steal 3rd. Now we move on to the next rule. 7.6-Q does not apply because they are no longer in the batter's box. Assume that the batter, when bailing, obtains a stationary position and does not move any more. This position was obtained prior to the catcher retrieving the ball. We now have only 7.6-R to use to rule on this play. If the batter is in the throwing lane (by the way, this term is not found in the rule book either
) do you have interference? Again, the batter does not move. Their initial movement put them in the throwing lane before the catcher retrieved the ball. They did not make any more movements.
What do you have and what rule are you using?
Edited to add this. I didn't completely read your post before replying. So once the batter sees they are in the way and can react they must get out of the way? The rule book doesn't spell it out that way but I can live with this interpretation. It seems to nicely reconcile the two responsibilities. The batter bailed to get out of the way of the pitch and is now out of the box. Intent is now required and if she sees she is in the way of the throw but decides not to move, there is intent. However, she must be given time to recognize this and time to do so. If this happens so quickly that she is off balance and can't avoid the throw, I can see where there is no interference and we have a live ball. Agree?