Batter Interference NFHS

[BSBAL18]

IN the case book, quote
"With R1 on third, R2 on first an no outs, R2 attempts to steal 2nd base. The pitch is strike 3 on the batter, however during F2 attempt to throw out R2, the batter interferes and the ball sails into the outfield, resulting in R1 scoring from third. RULING: The batter is out, and R1 returns to third base because that is the base he occupied at the time of the interference. IF the umpires judgement believes R2 would have been out on the steal, then R2 is out, otherwise R2 returns to first base".

So my question is...
I have always seen batter interference as the umpire calling dead-ball and calling the runner for 1st to 2nd out. Is batters interference differnet depending on the number of runners and "if" they are stealing? The case tells me that if I, the umpire, think they are going to throw out Ricky Henderson, then he's out, otherwise return to first. Perhaps MLB rules are different that NFHS in this regard?
What if there was a double steal? Why does R1 have to go back to third, but R2 is "umpire descretion".. i have no idea if its a delayed steal from 3rd, etc. How can i call a runner out if i dont even know if the defense had planned to throw the ball directly back to the pitcher to try to pick off 3rd base???

[bob jenkins]

The rules are different. In the case play, R1 is out, because he's the one who was played on.

As a practical matter, you're "always" going to have R1 out and not returned in the case play.

[thumpferee]

NFHS

Batter INT is delayed dead. If F2 retires the runner on his initial attempt, the INT is ignored.

In the OP the batter is out on strike 3. The rule is different.

See 7.3.5D and 8.4.2K (2019, which I believe is the OP play and is a mis-print. Should read, "attempts to throw out R1)

[johnnyg08]

Originally Posted by thumpferee

NFHS

Batter INT is delayed dead. If F2 retires the runner on his initial attempt, the INT is ignored.

In the OP the batter is out on strike 3. The rule is different.

See 7.3.5D and 8.4.2K (2019, which I believe is the OP play and is a mis-print. Should read, "attempts to throw out R1)

Get the out on this. BI on strike three, R1 is out. Keep it clean.

[ilyazhito]

This case play is out of date. FED now uses the same classifications as NCAA and OBR (R1 for runner on 1st base, R2 for runner on 2nd base, R3, for runner on 3rd base). The batter would be out on Strike 3, R1 would return to 1st, R2 would return to 2nd. A runner is not called out for interference by the batter, unless there is a play at home with less than 2 out. This is not the case, so R1 and R2 would return to their bases because of the interference by the now-retired batter.

[scrounge]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

This case play is out of date. FED now uses the same classifications as NCAA and OBR (R1 for runner on 1st base, R2 for runner on 2nd base, R3, for runner on 3rd base). The batter would be out on Strike 3, R1 would return to 1st, R2 would return to 2nd. A runner is not called out for interference by the batter, unless there is a play at home with less than 2 out. This is not the case, so R1 and R2 would return to their bases because of the interference by the now-retired batter.

Oh yes, there is, and this is the situation in which it occurs. Unless you are sure there was no play at all on any runner, the batter is out on the strikeout and the runner being played upon is out for the interference. If you aren't sure who is being played upon, get the runner closest to home.

From this year's casebook:

7.3.5 SITUATION D:

With R1 on first base and R2 on second base, one out and two strikes on B4, R1 and R2 attempt a double steal. B4 swings and misses the pitch and interferes with F2's attempt to throw out either R1 or R2.

RULING: If in the umpire's judgment F2 could have made a putout on the runner(s) but cannot determine where the play was going to be made because of the nature of the interference, the umpire will then call out the runner nearest home plate, which is R2.