Batter Interference????

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

My God, you just can't grasp the finer issues of the game. He is a runner once he has left his position in the batter's box. In the original play, he has not done so.

I once told a tale of calling ball four on a college player. He just stood there - the scoreboard clearly showed ball four and he is on scholarship at college, so I stood there. The head coach gave him another set of signs and the batter dug in, I shook my head and got ready. The defensive coach was beside himself. The next pitch comes in and it's another ball. While the kid is adjusting his gloves or helmet or self, the head coach sees that the count has been erased from the board and asks me for the count. I look at him and say, "5 and 2". It's a cold as Klondike March game, so he asks again. I repeat it and he says something like, "You've got to give him first base after four balls." I took off my mask and said that it is too hard to do my job and his. He got fired up or something because he turned all red. He must have been mad, because I didn't hear a peep from him for the rest of the game.

Where in the rule book does it say I have to tell the batter to leave the batter's box and properly take his place on first after the base on balls? On the contrary, it is pretty clear that the batter becomes a runner in such situation when he properly takes his place on first, not before. He is protected until he secures first, that is all. The original batter was still in the box immediately after the ball passed through the zone for ball four. He passed the bat in front of the catcher, who was attempting to make a play on an advancing runner, and the thrown ball was deflected by his bat. Pretend you've seen a runner stealing third on the pitch. What kind of timing are we talking about? A left handed batter (what I've said all along) will clearly see the runner stealing and have ample opportunity to displace the bat wthout causing the play to be altered. He didn't do that and the interference is called on him.

You continue to split hairs about predicting intent. Give it up. On this play, too many things are occuring and there is no way you can say it is not intentional. I don't infer innocence on plays like this. If you do, I know the perfect partner for you; SA meet BU. You guys will be terrific together. Thank you for keeping him company out there.

Don't write about my play - it's been discussed here before. I don't care if the batter could have hit a home run after ball four. In answer to the defensive coach, I would have said that he was fully aware of the count and his earlier levity was gone. He provided the pitch selection to his hurler and that negated any innocence on his part. Maybe it was cavalier but I don't point to first or say "Take your base." to collegiate players.