CR/SFG Catcher or Batter Interference?

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by GarthB

If he had gotten away with it, you can bet his next at bat would have ended by HPB.

Or even an HBP.

[DG]

How many times have you seen a player swing at a pitchout, with a runner running, and it be a legitimate attempt to hit the ball?

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by DG

How many times have you seen a player swing at a pitchout, with a runner running, and it be a legitimate attempt to hit the ball?

How many times have you seen it?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by DG

How many times have you seen a player swing at a pitchout, with a runner running, and it be a legitimate attempt to hit the ball?

And how many times does that "swing" result in interference? This time it might have, and it was called.

(Full disclosure: I didn't see the play, so I'm not giving my opionion of it. But, I can imagine such a situation where such a call would be the "right" one.)

[johnnyg08]

He still has a right to attempt to hit the ball...pitchers throwing at hitters and this sitch is apples and oranges...we've all been around the game long enough to in MLB when pitchers are throwing at hitters...this was a one time thing...it's not like hitters were doing this the entire game! We can agree to disagree here...that is CI all the way...the only way I would call this exact play BI...would be if the hitter swung ridiculously early or late.

[johnnyg08]

By the way....the batter has no clue that it's a pitchout probably until the last moment where he will decide to swing at the pitch or not...hitters are trained on a hit and run to swing at anything...the batter here made a legit, legal attempt at the pitch here...hitters swing and miss at pitches all the time. In a sitch like this...no matter what the call will be 50% of the players on the field and in the dugout will be pissed...I guess we can agree to disagree...just because this umpire is MLB, doesn't make his call 100% correct, interference/obstruction/etc...are judgement calls...all of what's been said on here is relevant and that's what makes umpiring great...if you know the rules, you have the power/authority to make judgement calls that often times lead to arguments by players/managers on each team. If this was my call, I'm calling interference and not one person on this board can say it would be the wrong call...just like I probably wouldn't argue a whole lot if an umpire called BI...but in my judgement, this is CI, not BI...

[UMP25]

Originally Posted by johnnyg08

If this was my call, I'm calling interference and not one person on this board can say it would be the wrong call......

I would, because based on what happened in THIS play, it would be the wrong call. For someone who claims not to be able to tell what's in a player's mind, you're being awfully assumptive by now claiming the batter didn't know it was a pitch out. Huh? Of course he did! Just what do you think he was swinging at? He knew it was a pitchout, he made an attempt to mess with the catcher, he interfered.

This opinion has nothing to do with the fact that an MLB Umpire made this call. It has to do with the evidence shown in that replay, evidence which is fairly clear. Even the Jaksa/Roder manual, which, according to the Joint Committee on Training and Evaluation, is the official authority on rulings, explains why situations like this would be batter's interference. I find it amazing that you imply they're wrong as well.

[mcrowder]

First and foremost, a batter has the right to swing at a pitch and try to hit it. Whether he was doing so to protect the runner or not is immaterial - the pitchout was thrown poorly enough that the hitter had a legitimate chance to hit it. The swing appears to be at the ball, and the batter appears to be looking at the ball. I see absolutely no grounds for BI here. If the batter was looking at the glove or the catcher when swinging, perhaps we have a different case. But if the pitcher can't throw a pitchout far enough away to make it unhittable, I can't see protecting his catcher when the batter does swing at it. I have clear, and blatant, CI on this play.

[UMP25]

A swing where the batter has to stretch and stick his bat out with no expected desire of contacting the ball for a hit is not a "legitimate" attempt to hit the ball. It's an attempt to mess with the catcher. The batter knew exactly what he was doing yesterday. These guys aren't stupid, you know. They try this schit all the time.