The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jun 16, 2006, 10:53am
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 21
Batter interference

Wearing my LL coach's hat on this play (10/11): Our opponents have R3 and then a marginal pitch is mishandled by our F2 and the ball rolls off to his left, behind the batter. B/R sees R3 breaking for home and starts backing out of the box to get out of the way; at the same time, F2 is going for the ball. In moving to get out of the way, however, the B/R kicks the ball (at least once, but maybe even twice) knocking the ball out of F2's reach. It was not intentional, but rather a result of his shuffling quickly backward out of the box while the ball, unfortunately, rolled right behind him.

Runner scores, ump is silent. I ask for interference, but the ump shakes his head. I let it go (because I'm an ump myself).

To me, this is a no-brainer interference call -- 7.09(a). Or am I missing something?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jun 16, 2006, 11:11am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Posts: 169
I don't know how this could be any more obvious, deliberate or not this is interference. The batter played a part in keeping the catcher from making a play? Shoot, that's an easy one.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jun 16, 2006, 12:05pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,577
Once the ball has eluded F2, the batter has become an "offensive teammate" for purposes of determining interference - and, in effect, the bar has been raised to rule so (since the defense has erred). That standard does not require intent, but does require a "blatant and avoidable" action to rule INT.

Not saying this wasn't INT, but just that it is more difficult to properly rule INT on a 'offensive teammate' than a batter. But I will opine that a passed ball that rolls right behind the batter (who steps on it as he is attempting to back out of the box and clear the play) will not get an INT call from me unless the kid obviously kicks at the ball or makes a more overt action.

Last edited by LMan; Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 12:08pm.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jun 16, 2006, 12:27pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,620
I'm with LMan: batter was doing what he was supposed to be doing, and I'm not rewarding the defense for screwing up. Unless I judge that the batter could reasonably be expected to have avoided the ball, play on.
__________________
Cheers,
mb
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jun 16, 2006, 12:47pm
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 21
Interested in these responses. How, in your view, do they square with 7.09(a), for which intentionality is irrelevant:
7.09 - It is interference by a batter or runner when:

(a) The batter hinders the catcher in an attempt to field the ball;

Kicking the ball out of the catcher's reach certainly hinders his ability to field the ball.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jun 16, 2006, 01:07pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,057
Send a message via Yahoo to UmpJM
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by NickG
Kicking the ball out of the catcher's reach certainly hinders his ability to field the ball.
NickG,

I could be wrong, but I believe the point that LMan & mbyron were making is that the F2 in the original situation was no longer "fielding the ball" - he had already had his chance to, and failed. He now is "chasing a loose ball" and is properly afforded less protection from "hindrance" by the offense under the rules. This distinction is discussed extensively in J/R.

Having said that, from your description in the initial post of this thread, I personally cannot tell whether BI should have been called or not. I would say that, if the ball were still within "a step and a reach" of the F2 at the time the batter (unintentionally) kicked it (in the umpire's sole judgement), a BI call would have been proper.

If the ball was beyond a step and a reach, live ball, play the bounce.

JM
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jun 16, 2006, 02:57pm
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 21
Thanks for the posts, guys. This is an interesting distinction and a good test case. I've learned something here.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jun 16, 2006, 08:46pm
DG DG is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,022
Similar play to consider. Runner on 2B and 1 out. Strike 3 is called but the ball pops out of the catcher's mitt and lands in front of the plate. Batter starts advance to 1B and kicks the ball unintentionally as he gets out of the box. Catcher chases the ball down and throws BR out at 1B. Meanwhile R2 rounds 3rd and seeing no catcher at the plate goes home and scores. Catcher had his chance to catch the ball and batter interference is no longer possible, unless intentional.

In this case catcher had is chance to catch the ball and batter did nothing intentional.

If coach wanted an explanation I would provide, not just shake my head.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jun 17, 2006, 02:54pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 52
I have had that same sitch happen to me in a JV game last spring, swinging 3rd strike catcher drops it and batter takes off running to first and UNintentionaly steps on the ball. I got the call right but I was the only one in the park who thought so. It was one of those sitches where yo make the wrong call and noone says a thing but the right call gets everyone upset.
__________________
There are no such things as close pitches, they are either balls or strikes.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Batter interference....or not? Yeggman Softball 1 Mon Apr 05, 2004 05:03pm
Batter Interference? WestMichBlue Softball 9 Thu Mar 18, 2004 11:11pm
Batter Interference PAblue87 Baseball 10 Thu May 23, 2002 10:06pm
Batter Interference - again efllblue Baseball 4 Tue May 08, 2001 08:44pm
Batter interference? Robert G Baseball 4 Sun Apr 22, 2001 11:37pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:45pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1