Strange play in small ball
 

Had a strange play in the league my son is playing. R2 and BR walks. As he starts for first he tosses the bat toward the dugout and F2 throws the ball to F5 as R2 is stealing and the bat hits the ball.

Wierd things happen in 10yr old baseball. ;)

I believe the umpires finally called BR out for interference, but was looking for a reference. They called me today and several of the officials seemed to think there had to be intent etc.,

I think its basic, BR interfering with a play by F2, but was looking for a case play etc., to print and give to the umpires/coaches.

Thanks
David

Once the batter walks, he is no longer a batter, and there needs to be intent in order for interference to be properly called. A 10 year old who can deliberately throw the bat in a way to be hit by the catcher's throw would be pretty good! Hard for me to justify an interference call here.

OBR 7.08 Any runner is out when--
(b) He intentionally interferes with a thrown ball; or hinders a fielder attempting to make a play on a batted ball;

I know I was reading that this morning, just looking for a case play, I"ll check by BRD.

Same situation, BR walks but on way to first interferes with F2 throwing to a base we would have interference. Some would say he's just doing what he's supposed to, going to first. There was no intent etc.,

Just trying to clarify,

Thansk
david

FED Case Play
 

Dave -

The following is a NFHS case play - so may or may not apply, depending on the rules set your son is playing under...at the very least, can give you something to ponder.

7.3.5 SITUATION I: With a runner on third base and one out, B3 receives ball
four for a base on balls. B3 takes several steps toward first base and then realizes he is still holding onto the bat. With his dugout on the third base side, he stops and tosses the bat in front of home plate towards his bench. As he tosses the bat, F2 throws the ball to third in an attempt to put out R1. The ball contacts the bat in mid-air and is deflected into dead-ball territory. RULING: The ball is dead. Interference is declared on the batter. If R1 had been attempting to steal home, R1 would be declared out and B3 awarded first base on the base on balls. If R1 was attempting to return to third base on the play, B3 is declared out for the interference. (7-3-5)

Thanks Bob that's what I wanted and just didn't have time to look for. That's what I had interpreted the play as but needed some justification before presenting it to the umpires who actually called the games etc.,

Thanks
David

Don't bet that it applies to an OBR/LL game without further research.

And most likely, your research will come up empty.

OBR/LL is pretty specific on the intent aspect of the interference violation by a batter/runner. In the FED case given, I'm having trouble seeing intent by the B/R, by simply throwing his bat toward his dugout.

I know what you are saying, but I look at the same way as typical batter interference.

The BR who simply backs out of the box after the pitch doesn't intend to interfere but if F2 steps into him or hits him etc., we have interference.

So I think how FED is interpreting it is the way that I am, you can have interference by the BR without intent.

But as you stated, I'm still looking for futher examples etc,.

Thanks
David

There's a specific rule about the batter stepping out of the box. Not the same animal.

NCAA 7-11-n
 

Windy stated the ruling applied to this situation, although F2 is usually standing over foul territory. He stated that the batter is responsible for his actions, whether his thrown bat ends up striking a thrown ball or a thrown ball ends up striking his thrown bat. At the time, that is before the AMLU strike, some folks insisted that the batter was required to "place the bat on the ground" and then take 1B because the rules prohibit a thrown bat. The B/R is also out by NCAA rule. Windy insisted the same was true for OBR.

Thanks for the assistance. This is surely a strange play, but we know FED wants the out, and this helps confirm. As the BRD says so often when there is no specific ruling, go with the others that have a ruling.

Looked at all of the different plays in the BRD and this play is not covered, but the essence of it is in several other plays, situations.

Thanks
DAvid

IMHO, absent intent I'd use a little of what Jim Evans calls "common sense and fair play." Just call "time" and kill everything--no penalty, no advancement (except those forced to advance by BR going to first). I'd bet 9.01(c) in OBR would cover this sensible ruling.

If one thinks about it, couldn't this be considered in the same manner as "weak interference" by a batter, that being when his backswing knocks the ball out of F2's glove and a runner on the bases takes off? There, you'd kill the ball and return any runner(s) with no penalty on the batter.