The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Thu Apr 19, 2001, 10:11pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,716
I need carification on batters interference on the catcher when the catcher is throwing to a base. If the catcher does not make the throw or attempt, do we still have the interference. Im not talking about the glaring obvious interference that we can call from our dinning room chair. Im talking about when the catcher stands up, pumps his arm and holds the throw because he believes that the throw could'nt be made because the batter interfered. What are some guidelines to use in making this call?
Ive had situations that were borderline and I've told the catcher that we will never know if he was interfered with, because he never made a throw. Was I correct.? I also realalize that I just cant call it because the catcher complained either. ?????????????
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Thu Apr 19, 2001, 11:08pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 711
Send a message via ICQ to Jim Porter Send a message via Yahoo to Jim Porter
Some things to think about:

The batter has the right to -
  • Strike at the ball
  • React naturally to the pitch in deciding to strike at it or not
  • Avoid an inside pitch
  • Stand still in the box

The batter may not -
  • Step out the box (unless avoiding an inside pitch)
  • Make any other movement not listed in the batter's rights above

The catcher does not necessarily have to throw if the umpire decides that the aborted throw was a direct result of the hindrance by the batter.

If the throw is made, we must wait before killing play to see if the throw is going to get the runner out or not. If the initial throw does not retire the runner, then invoke time and enforce the interference (do not wait to see if a rundown gets the runner - kill play if that first throw doesn't get him.)

When interference is called, the batter is always called out and the runner(s) returned. There is one exception - with less than two outs, and a runner from third is trying to score, if the batter interferes then the runner is called out instead - unless there are two outs and, in that case, the batter would be called out and the run would not score.
__________________
Jim Porter
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 20, 2001, 02:16pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 252
Batter-Runner Interference

On a dropped third strike with the batter-runner running outside the running lane, does the catcher have to throw the ball in order for interference to be invoked?
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 20, 2001, 02:22pm
Michael Taylor
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Yes in that case the throw has to be made. One is batter's interference, the other is interference on the BR. Two different calls.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 20, 2001, 08:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,716
Reply to Jim Porter

I am in agreement with everthing you stated.

Your use of a Bold (if) tells me, (and please correct if Im wrong), that unless Im am totally convinced that the catcher did not throw the ball because he was interfered with, than I should allow the game to play on.

I was being led to believe, that calling the batter out for interference such as mentioned above, was a pretty clear and routine call against the batter. And all this has to be decided right after we get the pitch call correct. Thats why I love officiating this sport.!!!
Thankyou.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:30pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1