Batter Interference????

[SAump]

1) "That would put you in a very select group of umpires who would allow interference to occur without penalty."

Remember the Clemmons-Piazza Allstar matchup. Roger threw a broken bat towards the dugout. NO INTENT -> NO PENALTY from a very select group of MLB umpires.

2) "I wouldn't brag about that. If it's interference, it comes with a penalty."

Please explain which player was recentaly penalized by RULE similar to NCAA 8-5-o. Limit reply to post-2000, and try not to quote more than half-dozen REALISTIC sitches. US less-experienced folks should have plenty of examples to put in our back pocket.

3) "Try to stick with the play that EVERYONE ELSE is discussing. The batter did not toss his bat backwards."

That's right, he tomahawked IT backwards toward the 3B dugout. 1B is in the forwards direction. But I can't figure out if it was vertically or horizontally. I will let you decide. He didn't hit the catcher. He hit the ball.

I don't know how many feet from the catcher's hand, but I guess F2 flinched. The catcher NOW flinches everytime the batters walks, trying to get one of you EXPERTS to BUY the INTERFERENCE CALL again. He just loves positive reinforcement.

4) "It's only foolish because you were shown to be wrong with regards to the application."

NO Winy. You added so many changes to the damn play that the batter actually did interfere, a simple call. He probably swung late in anger, threw the bat, raised his arms, pointed his finger into the catcher's face and yelled out some profanity because he hates 4-0 counts.

5) "Who cares what odds are involved?" Gamblers!

6) "Baseball games are filled with fluke plays that involve uncommon activities."

Sounds like organized cheating. Are you serious about that? That was really weird, still HOT AIR, now turn yourself in.

7) "Your comment about laughing and dancing about getting a good break is ridiculous. It happens all of the time; maybe not on your tee ball field, but I see momentum swings all of the time. Coaches are allowed to laugh and celebrate good fortune. You did know that, didn't you?"

I agree, YOU most probably are COUNTRY music fan and a hit with the ladies. Those dance halls are definitely rockin' past midnight. The dudes dig the long ball and I hope YOU wear protection behind home plate.

8) "Travesty of the game? Please find that illustration of this play in any pertinent umpire manual; hurry, before the others start laughing at you some more."

I thought you knew the rule. You wrote it remember. You want drawings? Now I really wonder about its validity.

9) "Keep changng the play and putting words in our mouths. The words that matter are all there in black and white - we wrote them long ago. You've been informed that you were wrong and you keep proving how little you actually know. Did you notice that you are standing alone? Keep enforcing those imaginary rules.
__________________
"You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers.

Now that's interference.

[PWL]

Originally posted by BigUmp56
Windy:

Please explain how this is "batters interference" in the original play?

If it's interference at all, it would have to be runners interference where intent is required to interfere with a thrown ball. It's really not that complicated. I'm not saying this couldn't be interference. That would depend on judgment as to whether or not there was intent. However, to say intent is not required, which is what your original contention was is incorrect.

Professional Interpretation: A batter has completed his time at-bat anytime he hits a fair ball, or he hits a foul ball that is caught in flight for an out. He also is considered to have completed his time at-bat anytime he is declared out under any provision of Rules 6.05,6.06, and 6.07. In addition, a batter is considered to have legally completed his time at-bat anytime he is awarded first base under the provisions of Rule 6.08, or he becomes a runner under the provisions of 6.09.


Tim.

Apprantley you forgot when I brought this up about 8 pages earlier in this thread. Remember, when I mentioned that everyone was using the term batter or batter/runner. The PBUC ruling said base runner. I mentioned something about this being runners' interference instead or it being a possible typo. Then you went off on one of you rants about how everybody but me knows what a batter or batter/runner is.

Now it seems to me, your echoing the very same thing that I was pointing out.

So which is it, dill hole? Make up your freaking mind already. Everytime you try to make someone look stupid, all you accomplish is the reverse. Again, you've stepped in a big pile of yourself, slipped, and fell all in it.

Why you will alway be a "Haagy".

[SAump]

"Pro-Rules:
Runner on third base."

YOU continue to insist on the phantom attempt to steal third base, again and again.

You were wrong before and you are wrong again. Please don't ever mention it again.

STOP. I can't take it.

[BigUmp56]

PWL:

You just don't have the wherewithall yet to understand that a batter-runner and a base runner are virtually the same thing when it comes to applying most the rules. They are runners! The batter-runner is still a batter-runner as he comes into second on a clean double. At the end of continuing action and when a new batter steps in the box he then becomes R2.

For interference and obstruction there a few additional rules for a batter-runner in OBR.

Interference for example on a runing lane violation applies only to a batter-runner. And, of course on obstruction you have type A obstruction on a batter-runner not being played on before he reaches first base when for others you have type B when no play is being made.

Then there are some interpretational differences such as desertion ~vs~ abandonment, and no run scoring when the third out is recorded before the batter-runner obtains first base. I could spend the time to write it all out for you, but you wouldn't understand it anyway.

You must have one heck of a nice clown store to buy your uniform and equipment from there in the Dallas Fort Worth area. I'm wondering how you can get down the line to cover third with those big funny red shoes. Wait, I forgot, you don't go down the line. You already told us you like to camp out on the plate.


Tim.

[PWL]

ForrestUmp56, there you go again trying to make an end run by changing the subject with a bunch of double talk that doesn't even pertain to the subject at hand.

But, isn't that what you do best when you get caught with head in your "cookie jar". Start rambling and try to change the subject.

You must be the stupidest umpire on the Internet.

"Stupid is as stupid does"...ForrestUmp56

[BigUmp56]

Switching subjects to what?

This was your first question.

Originally posted by PWL
This ruling is using a base runner. Why is everybody referring to the player as a batter or batter/runner?

I made this response to show you exactly why we were referring to him as a batter-runner.

Originally posted by BigUmp56
Because that's what a batter is after he completes his time at bat. Duh.......

Tim.

Then you came up with this tripe.

Originally posted by PWL
Where in the ruling does it say the batter completed his time at bat?

I bet you got wore out in dodgeball!!!! [/B]

Now, admittedly I didn't respond to your dumb query because NFUmp beat me to it with his response.

Originally posted by NFump
I guess you mean where in the original sitch. That would be the part where he wrote:

Pro-Rules:
Runner on third base. Count is 3-0 to the batter. Ball 4 is issued to the batter. Umpire calls ball 4 and the batter throws his bat to the dugout while standing in the batters box. In the process of doing that the catcher pops up and throws the ball down to 3rd base to try to pick off the runner. Right after the catcher throws the ball, the ball hits the bat in mid air and the ball falls to the ground a few feet from the catcher. The batter runs to first and the runner on third comes home to score.

Does this clear it up for you, PWL?

Your next gem.

Originally posted by PWL
This is what I'm talking about. At no time does said poster mention base runner threw bat or helmet.

He did mention batter in his initial post. However, any umpire worth the elastic in his jock knows that on ball four a batter becomes a batter-runner.

Originally posted by PWL
Now, I understand the original play and what is being talked about. Does the ruling mention a batter? No.

Why would a ruling that applies to a runner throwing his bat at a thrown ball need to mention a batter? You're still showing here that you just don't understand the rules, and obviously you don't understand the original play.

Next.

Originally posted by PWL
That's why I'm asking. Does the PBUC reference this particular play for the 4:18 ruling if base runner and batter are meant to be one and the same?

Of course they're not the same. Why would they be? You keep getting hung up on the play incorrectly mentioning a batter.
The ruling applies here because he's no longer a batter and you can't seem to grasp that concept.


Next.

Originally posted by PWL
BTW-A batter doesn't become a base runner when he completes his time at bat.

Even though you've been shown that the batter became a batter-runner after he legally completed his time at bat you still don't get it. For only a few exceptions a base runner and a batter-runner are the same. The BR and R1 for example only denote their original position on the play when the batter becomes a runner. I showed you a couple of those differences and either your too stubborn or too dumb to understand.


No, we're on the same subject. That subject is that you don't even understand the basics of the rules. You prove this time and time again. I'll leave you once again to your childish remarks and personal jabs. It won't change the fact that everyone here considers you to be either a joke or a disgrace.


Tim.

[PWL]

Way to edit "HAAGY". Keep twisting words like your panties must getting.

Why don't you go back to McGriffs where you can show everybody the pen is more powerful than the sword.

Actually, your still the laughing stock of every board I've ever read. I don't think I've seen my name mentioned on those other websites.

Now I'll admit I don't know everything. But unlike you I don't pretend to.

Keep talking in circles because everyone knows hows dizzy you are.

Take my advice and get some professional help. It can't be good for your mental health sitting all day, every day trolling umpire forums from the time you get up until the time you pass out at your computer.

"Stupid is as stupid does"...ForrestUmp56

[BigUmp56]

It must really bother you that I have an office at work and the freedom to peruse these sites when I have the time.

You shouldn't concern yourself with how much time I spend on umpiring forums. You should instead turn your attention to learning anything even remotely applicable to officiating baseball. A concept that is obviously beyond you is learning the rules of the game. You can't hide forever on that freshman field with your mantra, "because I say so." Eventually even the freshman coaches will want you gone, if they already made that decision now.

The reason you don't see your name on other forums is due to the fact that you are a coward hiding annonymously on multiple sites under mutiple alias's.

You wouldn't dare give your real name because we would then be able to find out for sure that your full of it.


Tim.

No do us all a favor, and....



[Edited by BigUmp56 on Feb 16th, 2006 at 01:58 PM]

[PWL]

Originally posted by NFump


PBUC 4.18 Thrown ball strikes helmet or bat: If a thrown ball strikes a helmet or bat accidentally (no intent on part of runner to interfere) in fair or foul territory, the ball remains in play the same as if it had not hit the helmet or bat.
If, in the umpire's judgement, there is intent on the part of a base runner to interfere with a thrown ball by dropping his helmet or bat or by throwing either at the ball, then the runner would be out, the ball dead, and runners would return to the last base legally touched.

Oh, ForrestUmp56

Here is the ruling for the original play in the thread that you were being to death earlier. Looks like you did a little play on words

Care to elaborate. Do you see the word batter or batter/runner.

So it sounds like after he receives ball four he becomes a runner. He is no longer a batter or batter/runner. He is a BASE RUNNER. So your getting on WWTB about this. Quit making up rules (lies) to cover your butt.

If you have personal vendeattas, go back to McGriffs where you are judge, jury, and executioner.

Twist something or edit a post. I bet you are one fair and impartial umpire. NEVER TRUST A LIAR, NEVER.

Say what you want about me. Just don't call me a LIAR.
"Stupid is as stupid doses"....ForrestUmp56

[BigUmp56]

I can't believe you still don't get it! A batter-runner is a base runner! Batter-runner just denotes his position between home and first.

Tim.