Interference Questions

[cshs81]

Which, if any, of these situations are considered interference?


1. R2, pitch rolls away from the catcher, BR steps out of the box to watch his runner and inadvertantly kicks the ball. R2 reaches 3rd base safely.

2. Popup on the first base line. F3 slides over to foul territory to catch the ball. BR veers to the fair side of him in order to avoid contact, F3 has misjudged the ball and now comes back into fair territory and there is a collision. Ball drops.

[UmpJM]

cshs81,

The second one (only). 7.09(i)

JM

[cshs81]

Originally Posted by CoachJM

cshs81,

The second one (only). 7.09(i)

JM

I'm guessing the "inadvertantly" part is the key factor????

What if the catcher picked up the ball that got away and could not throw to 3rd because the batter was backing up ? Lets assume we deem that he was not intentionally getting in the way of the catcher.

[LMan]

Originally Posted by cshs81

What if the catcher picked up the ball that got away and could not throw to 3rd because the batter was backing up ? Lets assume we deem that he was not intentionally getting in the way of the catcher.

No intent, no INT. Once the defense has misplayed the pitch, the bar for INT goes higher.

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by cshs81

What if the catcher picked up the ball that got away and could not throw to 3rd because the batter was backing up ? Lets assume we deem that he was not intentionally getting in the way of the catcher.

If the batter got hit by a actual throw or impeded with the catchers attempt to throw, you would have interference in this case. By attempt, I mean there was contact between the two. Batter should remain in his box during this play. Do not judge intent.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by LMan

No intent, no INT. Once the defense has misplayed the pitch, the bar for INT goes higher.

You are right.

[UMP25]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

You are right.

Except that "no intent, no interference" is not correct. One need not have intent to have interference.

[LMan]

Correct. Poor wording on my part, sorry.

What I should have said was, in this specific instance, since the defense has misplayed the ball, the bar for the batter's INT with the throw very closely approaches the 'intent' level, if not past it.

[bluezebra]

OBR RULE 2 DEFINITIONS

INTERFERENCE

(a) Offensive interference is an act by the team at bat which interferes with, obstructs, impedes, hinders or confuses any fielder attempting to make a play. If the umpire declares the batter, batter runner, or a runner out for interference, all other runners shall return to the last base that was in the judgment of the umpire, legally touched at the time of the interference, unless otherwise provided by these rules. In the event the batter runner has not reached first base, all runners shall return to the base last occupied at the time of the pitch.

Where do you read "misplayed", "intent" or "intentional"?

6.06 A batter is out for illegal action when-

(c) He interferes with the catcher's fielding or throwing by stepping out of the batter's box or making any other movement that hinders the catcher's play at home base.

EXCEPTION: Batter is not out if any runner attempting to advance is put out, or if runner trying to score is called out for batter's interference. If the batter interferes with the catcher, the plate umpire shall call "interference." The batter is out and the ball dead. No player may advance on such interference (offensive interference) and all runners must return to the last base that was, in the judgment of the umpire, legally touched at the time of the interference. If, however, the catcher makes a play and the runner attempting to advance is put out, it is to be assumed there was no actual interference and that runner is out_not the batter. Any other runners on the base at the time may advance as the ruling is that there is no actual interference if a runner is retired. In that case play proceeds just as if no violation had been called. If a batter strikes at a ball and misses and swings so hard he carries the bat all the way around and, in the umpire's judgment, unintentionally hits the catcher or the ball in back of him on the backswing before the catcher has securely held the ball, it shall be called a strike only (not interference). The ball will be dead, however, and no runner shall advance on the play.

Again, where do you read "misplayed", "intent" or "intentional"?

Batter's out for interference, runner is returned to 2B.

Bob

[LMan]

Sigh.


J/R opines that once the pitch has been misplayed by F2, the batter is now an 'offensive teammate' for purposes of INT. Generally speaking, INT by an offensive teammate needs to be 'blatant and avoidable' to be called such. Now, this OP could still be called INT, I only state that the bar for such a call is higher for a misplayed pitch than a cleanly caught pitch. IMO, this higher standard very nearly must be intent, or 'blatant and avoidable' indifference.

Your cites do not address pitches that have passed F2, but rather pitches correctly handled by F2. Again, another reason why one often must go to other authoritative sources to resolve unusual situations.
And no, you probably won't find 'INT by offensive teammate', 'neighborhood play', or 'last time by' in the OBR ruleset, either.

[njdevs00cup]

[QUOTE=bluezebra][B]OBR RULE 2 DEFINITIONS

INTERFERENCE


[B]6.06 A batter is out for illegal action when-

(c) He interferes with the catcher's fielding or throwing by stepping out of the batter's box or making any other movement that hinders the catcher's play at home base.

If the batter swings and misses at strike three and interferes w/ the catcher attempting to put out R1. Is R1 out also since the batter is already out by striking out?

[UmpJM]

njdevs00cup,

Yes, he would. If the umpire judges that the batter (who has just struck out) is guilty of interfering with the F2's attempt to retire R1, R1 is called out on the interference of his recently retired teammate.

JM