CR/SFG Catcher or Batter Interference?

[johnnyg08]

By the way I personally asked Steve Polermo what manual they use for rule interpretations and it is not the J/R book...it's a Blue MLB rules interpretations (that's not the title of the book) book...he didn't say that what is in J/R is wrong, but for official interpretations on MLB fields, they do not use the J/R book...I'm sure many of you on here knew that...but it was news to me...though I did figure that they had their own book...for the life of me I can't find the dang thing though...since I would also like a copy...strangely enough he didn't let me have his! LOL!!

[UMP25]

Two of the umpires on the Joint Committee explained to me that the Committee, which serves as the official authority on rulings, turns to the J/R manual when they need to come up with an official ruling with which they may need help.

While this link doesn't deal with the J/R aspect of it, it is an example of the Joint Committee issuing official rulings.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by UMP25

Two of the umpires on the Joint Committee explained to me that the Committee, which serves as the official authority on rulings, turns to the J/R manual when they need to come up with an official ruling with which they may need help.

While this link doesn't deal with the J/R aspect of it, it is an example of the Joint Committee issuing official rulings.

But it was written by the R in J/R, Rick Roder.

[johnnyg08]

Certainly I'm sure they may consult the book, why not, right? but they use their own manual for official interpretations.

[3appleshigh]

Since when does the Attempt to Hit the ball mean Hit the ball for a HIT. If this was a hit and run, the batters job is to a) get a hit, or B) foul the ball off to protect the runner. Both are legitamate "ATTEMPT's to HIT". BI would be the last thing on my mind until I ruled out every other possibility. And I cannot see how you could rule out CI. I would call batting out of the box before BI.

[GarthB]

The umpire adjudged this to be BI. I wasn't there. Those of you who were should continue to argue this.

As for it not being the catcher's job to get in position to make a play on a stealing runner....you must not have been a catcher.

[gsf23]

Originally Posted by GarthB

The umpire adjudged this to be BI. I wasn't there. Those of you who were should continue to argue this.

As for it not being the catcher's job to get in position to make a play on a stealing runner....you must not have been a catcher.

Well, I guess there is no point to this forum if the only calls we can discuss are calls that we were actually there to see.

Yes I did catch. I'm not saying that he isn't supposed to try to get in postion to make the play. I'm saying that the reason you swing is not to distract the catcher, it is to keep him from stepping FORWARD to catch the ball sooner. Did I try that when I was catching? Of course I did, but I also knew that if I got hit with a bat, it would be CI on me for being up that close.

[UMP25]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

But it was written by the R in J/R, Rick Roder.

So? Rick was just reporting what happened. That doesn't change what happened.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by UMP25

So? Rick was just reporting what happened. That doesn't change what happened.

You said that it didn't deal with the J/R aspect of it, and I just thought it was funny (like the name Julia Gulia was to Robby Hart in The Wedding Singer) that Rick Roder penned the interpretation. I didn't mean anything by my remark.