Is it interference?

[dash_riprock]

lj - change it to R3,R2 and we'll all know where the runners are. And under the FED way of describing the play, it would have to be B3 (or higher), not B1. (See how silly it is?)

It's not a play at the plate. INT on a thrown ball must be intentional. Live ball.

[mick]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

It's not a play at the plate. INT on a thrown ball must be intentional. Live ball.

What if a batter loses balance and stumbles into the catcher's throw to a base?

[johnnyg08]

we'd have to see it Mick. Still might be nothing...

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by mick

What if a batter loses balance and stumbles into the catcher's throw to a base?

INT. Batter is out, return the runners.

[mick]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

Quote:

INT. Batter is out, return the runners.

After having read the rest of your posts, I now understand what you meant to say.

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

It's not a play at the plate. INT on a thrown ball must be intentional. Live ball.

One hundred people surveyed and you said INT on a thrown ball must intentional. Live ball.

Show us INT on a thrown ball must be intentional. Live ball.

Ding! Survey says, "one".

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

One hundred people surveyed and you said INT on a thrown ball must intentional. Live ball.

Show us INT on a thrown ball must be intentional. Live ball.

Ding! Survey says, "one".

I will try to keep this a meaningful discussion on a rules interpretation.

Here's my view:

Batter's interference occurs when the batter interferes with the catcher's fielding or throwing at home plate. In this case, F2 has chased a ball that has gone back to the screen, and the batter is still at or near the plate. The batter has been hit with a thrown ball, but he has not interfered with the catcher's action or play at home plate. I can't find a rule in any code covering the batter interfering with a thrown BALL, so I will get guidance from the rule covering a runner interfering with a thrown BALL, i.e., any interference must be intentional (all codes). That is why I have no INT and a live ball.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

lj - change it to R3,R2 and we'll all know where the runners are. And under the FED way of describing the play, it would have to be B3 (or higher), not B1. (See how silly it is?)

It's not a play at the plate. INT on a thrown ball must be intentional. Live ball.

I agree with this analysis.

[Richard_Siegel]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Originally Posted by dash_riprock
INT on a thrown ball must be intentional. Live ball.

I agree with this analysis.

INT on a thrown ball must be intentional BY A RUNNER. This is a batter at HP, it is a different situation.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by Richard_Siegel

INT on a thrown ball must be intentional BY A RUNNER. This is a batter at HP, it is a different situation.

See post #10

[rngrck]

How about this scenrio? Bases loaded with same situation but F2's throw to 3rd hit B1's bat and deflects into dugout. How many runners score? This actually happened in a game.

[dash_riprock]

If it's INT, none. If not, 2.

[johnnyg08]

if the hitter is doing his job, you can't penalize him for the ball accidentally hitting his bat. dash riprock is correct.

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by rngrck

How about this scenrio? Bases loaded with same situation but F2's throw to 3rd hit B1's bat and deflects into dugout. How many runners score? This actually happened in a game.

You left out a key ingredient. Day or night game.........

[greymule]

Darned if I didn't have two such plays last year:

1. Abel on 2B, Baker on 1B, 1 out. Batter (the pitcher) fouls off two bunt attempts on outside pitches. On the next pitch, the batter crowds the plate as he squares to try a 2-strike bunt, and Abel is off on the pitch. F1 smokes the inside corner for strike 3 and the batter gets off balance as he flinches on the close pitch. F2, standing practically up against the batter, pumps once with the batter in the way, causing the batter to flinch again and reflexively raise his hands (bat in left hand) about shoulder high. Now F2 throws to 3B too late, and the ball ticks the bat (without any perceptible deflection). Safe at 3B.

F2 asks me whether that should have been INT on the batter. I said no, since the batter didn't intentionally interfere. I admit, though, that because the batter's flinch caused his hands to rise, I've run that play through my mind many times since.

2. In another strange one, with Abel on 3B and 0 outs, the RH batter took ball 3 outside and then stepped backwards out of the box to adjust his grip on the bat. I'm expecting F2 to throw the ball back to the pitcher, but instead he suddenly tries a snap throw to 3B to pick off Abel. The ball hits the batter's helmet and caroms into the stands.

Abel ran home, but I sent him back and let play resume. I know that it has to be either interference on the batter (steps out the box and interferes with a play) or simply a ball thrown into DBT. However, I figured that since the throw came after the batter stepped out—later than the usual timing we think of for such a play—I couldn't call the batter out. I also couldn't award Abel home, since the batter shouldn't have been out of the box. The offensive coach asked about the ruling but to my surprise accepted my explanation. Again, I've ruminated over that play ever since.