Batter Interference?
 

Like to think I got this right today. I think some wording in a case play supports this even though the sitch isn't the same.

R1, two outs

pitch comes in (ball/strike not relevant) and R1 takes off for second, catcher begins to pull ball from glove to throw down to second and get the runner when the batters follow through carries the bat into the catchers glove hindering his ability to pull the ballout and throw down. I immediately rule batter interference and call the batter out to end the half inning. Coaches go nuts, I tell him the follow through is his responsibility and he disagrees, game goes on, they win 4-3 anyway.

In a FED game, the batter is responsible for his follow-through, and since the FED does not allow for "weak" interference, the batter is out.

In an NCAA game, if in the umpire's judgment the batter accidentally contacted the catcher as the pitch was caught, then the pitch is a strike only (not interference), the ball is dead, and the runner returns to first base (unless it was strike 3, where the batter would be out, but not the runner).

In OBR, it is almost the same as NCAA, but the wording is "before the catcher has securely held the ball." (see 6.06 (c) Comments). It also uses the language, "unintentionally" instead of "accidentally."

The official PBUC interpretation is: "If the batter is in the batter's box and his normal backswing or follow-through unintentionally strikes the catcher or the ball while the catcher is in the act of throwing, "Time" is called and runners return (unless the catcher's initial throw retires the runner)."

(So, wait until you see if the catcher's throw gets the runner before calling Time, naturally!:))

The official PBUC approved mechanic for this call (if the catcher's throw does not retire the runner) is, ""Backswing hit the catcher!" and simultaneously point to the batter, and then yell and signal "Time."

Another type:

What is your requirement to call int. on a batter in the follow senario's

a) R1 stealling, Batter, swings hard at a good pitch "grove ball" and misses, momentum taking him across the plate one or two steps. Catcher throws the balll -- What do you require to rule int on the Batter, Contact, a bad throw or is him being there enough.

b) R1 stealing Batter Swings and misses a nasty outside curveball, and his momentum carries him over the plate in the same manner as above. Catcher throws the balll -- What do you require to rule int on the Batter, Contact, a bad throw or is him being there enough.

In both situations the batter does nothing to duck or make sure he is out of the way.

what difference does it make what kind of pitch it was?

What if it's c) a knuckler, or d) a low outside fast ball?

Interference. What about the players who swing out of their socks on every pitch. Call interference here...you don't need contact.

There is no intent required for Interference in these cases. The only question in the original was concerning the backswing/follow-through ruling. What you are describing is interference, as long as you judge that the batter's actions contributed to the catcher's bad throw. If the throw does not retire the runner, call the batter out for INT, and send the runner back. The batter just being there is not enough for INT, BTW.

I'm not saying the type of pitch does matter, Just asking the question. I have heard Ump's say it does, I have always disagreed. Only once have I felt inclinde to give the Batter the benifit of the doubt on the INT, was a pitch the was very inside most likely would have hit the batter, he did a slide jumpback to get out of the way and over corrected launching himself forward. I felt that since the Def had Erred in the Pitch, and that was the largest contributing factor for where the Batter ended up, that INT would reward the DEF for the poor pitch.

Steve : how do you describe a "Bad Throw". In my head anyway, I have it that if the catcher needs to alter his natural motion, or his view is blocked, so after he releases the ball, he is looking around to find out what happened. I am a firm believer that seeing the Target is a huge factor in Accuracy. But as I'm aware you need to call the interference when it happens, If the runner is retired then you ignore the INT, but it still needs to be called before knowing what will happen at the other end of the play.