Runner Question

[Rufus]

This is from USSSA Rules (OBR):

8.07.H
If, with a runner on third (3rd) base and trying to score by means of a squeeze play or a steal, the catcher or any other fielder steps on, or in front of home base without possession of the ball, or touches the batter or his bat, the pitcher shall be charged with a balk, the batter shall be awarded first (1st) base on the interference and the ball is dead.

How often does this come up? How is a catcher supposed to field a squeeze bunt (not that they would - they're probably the only fielder who could receive a throw and attempt to tag R3 trying to score on a squeeze) if they can't cross or step in front of home? Are they supposed to just stay behind the plate?

Then there's this one from the other side of things (i.e., from the Batter's perspective):
8.06.I.3
A batter is out for illegal action when: 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.

On a squeeze/steal home, then, should the batter just freeze in the batter's box? Wouldn't that impede the catcher making a play? Should the Batter back out of the box and risk interfering that way (i.e., making any other movement that hinders)?

Any help in understand the application of these rules would be appreciated.

[PeteBooth]

You are forgetting about the batter. The batter has the right to offer at any pitch he so chooses. If F2 steps in front of home plate then B1 is prevented from doing this.

Now if F1 disengaged properly then he is no longer classified as F1 but an infielder and now F2 may move up to receive the throw. If B1 attempts to hit the ball then it is the batter who will have interfered.

Pete Booth

[UmpJM]

Rufus,

In the last 183 games I have worked, I have seen this happen exactly once - so I would say it doesn't come up too often.

The rule only constrains the cathcer AFTER the batter had had the opportunity to offer at the pitch. If the batter bunts the ball into play, the catcher may go wherever he needs to in order to field the bunt.

JM

[jdmara]

I've seen this happen once as well. Any intelligent batter would swing/attempt to bunt the pitch if the catcher steps in front of the plate on a squeeze/steal. It doesn't happen very often though. I have seen a pitcher step off the rubber and throw home (as a fielder) and the batter hit the throw thinking it was a pitch. Gotta love baseball.

-Josh

[Rufus]

Thanks for the quick replies, I do appreciate them. At the risk of being too troublesome would you also take a look at the added question to the OP? I think, in researching prior posts, the answer is that the batter, whether or not they make contact, has an obligation to move out of the way (i.e., out of the batter's box and away from any current/potential play) but would appreciate confirmation.

[Fritz]

Originally Posted by Rufus

Thanks for the quick replies, I do appreciate them. At the risk of being too troublesome would you also take a look at the added question to the OP? I think, in researching prior posts, the answer is that the batter, whether or not they make contact, has an obligation to move out of the way (i.e., out of the batter's box and away from any current/potential play) but would appreciate confirmation.

Like JM said, by definition and practice, the batter is going to square around on a squeeze so it is pretty easy to call it when the catcher interferes with the batter's opportunity at that point.

Re your second question, it is my understanding the batter is protected as long as he remains in the box and doesn't INTENTIONALLY do anything to interfere with the play. You see this on steals to 3rd and a RH batter all the time. But, if the batter does have time to get out of the way on a play, like on a passed ball, then he should.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by Fritz

Re your second question, it is my understanding the batter is protected as long as he remains in the box and doesn't INTENTIONALLY do anything to interfere with the play. .

The actual rule:

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.

____________

Notice the lack of the word "intentional."

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

The actual rule:

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.

____________

Notice the lack of the word "intentional."

Keep in mind that we don't want the catcher just plunking the batter to get an interference call.

MLBUM 6.10

If the batter interferes with the catcher's throw to retire a runner by stepping out of the batter's box, interference shall be called on the batter under Official Baseball Rule 6.06(c). (See Section 6.8.)

However, if the batter is standing in the batter's box and he or his bat is struck by the catcher's throw back to the pitcher (or throw in attempting to retire a runner) and, in the umpire's judgment, there is no intent on the part of the batter to interfere with the throw, the ball is alive and in play.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

Keep in mind that we don't want the catcher just plunking the batter to get an interference call.

MLBUM 6.10

If the batter interferes with the catcher's throw to retire a runner by stepping out of the batter's box, interference shall be called on the batter under Official Baseball Rule 6.06(c). (See Section 6.8.)

However, if the batter is standing in the batter's box and he or his bat is struck by the catcher's throw back to the pitcher (or throw in attempting to retire a runner) and, in the umpire's judgment, there is no intent on the part of the batter to interfere with the throw, the ball is alive and in play.

You are referring to a different situation in which the batter "is standing in the batter's box", while I, on the underhand, addressed the comment made by the previous poster: "as long as he remains in the box and doesn't INTENTIONALLY do anything to interfere."

The poster to whom I was addressing implied action by the batter, in which case, "intent" is not a factor.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

You are referring to a different situation in which the batter "is standing in the batter's box", while I, on the underhand, addressed the comment made by the previous poster: "as long as he remains in the box and doesn't INTENTIONALLY do anything to interfere."

The poster to whom I was addressing implied action by the batter, in which case, "intent" is not a factor.

You quoted 6.06(c) and said intent isn't mentioned.

I posted the MLBUM interpretation concerning 6.06(c) which says intent IS a factor.

And you claim it isn't relevant?

[aceholleran]

The CS&FP rule book has the batter getting out of Dodge on a play at the plate.

I had a textbook 6.06(c) in LL once. R2 stealing 3B, F2 flubs the pitch, and B1, fleeing the batter's box, accidentally kicked the pitch away.

Ace

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

You quoted 6.06(c) and said intent isn't mentioned.

I posted the MLBUM interpretation concerning 6.06(c) which says intent IS a factor.

And you claim it isn't relevant?

I addressed a specific comment in a specific post. That comment regarded intent whie taking action, which is a consideration in neither the rule, nor the MLBUM. Your post, addressing nothing that either the OP posted or anything I posted, is indeed irrelevant.

I know some posters here like to respond to a specific question or statement and then add, "but in a different scenario, here's another answer." I am not one of those. My replies are fairly well focused on the scenarios provided.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

In the last 183 games I have worked, I have seen this happen exactly once - so I would say it doesn't come up too often.

John,

I know you haven't been umpJM for too long. Are the last 183 games you worked also the first 183 games you worked?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Rufus

This is from USSSA Rules (OBR):

8.07.H
If, with a runner on third (3rd) base and trying to score by means of a squeeze play or a steal, the catcher or any other fielder steps on, or in front of home base without possession of the ball, or touches the batter or his bat, the pitcher shall be charged with a balk, the batter shall be awarded first (1st) base on the interference and the ball is dead.

How often does this come up? How is a catcher supposed to field a squeeze bunt (not that they would - they're probably the only fielder who could receive a throw and attempt to tag R3 trying to score on a squeeze) if they can't cross or step in front of home? Are they supposed to just stay behind the plate?

The rule is referring to the catcher interfering with the batter's ability to hit / bunt the pitch. That is, "If the catcher jumps in front of the plate and catches the pitch before it reaches the batter, .... award" Once the ball is bunted, this rule doesn't apply.

Then there's this one from the other side of things (i.e., from the Batter's perspective):
8.06.I.3
A batter is out for illegal action when: 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.

On a squeeze/steal home, then, should the batter just freeze in the batter's box? Wouldn't that impede the catcher making a play? Should the Batter back out of the box and risk interfering that way (i.e., making any other movement that hinders)?

Any help in understand the application of these rules would be appreciated.

Again, this is referring to the BATTER, not the BATTER-RUNNER. So, in the squeeze situation, it implies that the batter missed the ball. The batter can then "act like a batter" (think of the many "missed" sacrifice bunts -- what does the batter do?), but any other movement would make him liable for interference.

[Rufus]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Again, this is referring to the BATTER, not the BATTER-RUNNER. So, in the squeeze situation, it implies that the batter missed the ball. The batter can then "act like a batter" (think of the many "missed" sacrifice bunts -- what does the batter do?), but any other movement would make him liable for interference.

Bob - thanks, this is exactly what I was trying to get at. How, specifically, would a batter "act like a batter" after missing a squeeze bunt, with R3 coming to home, and not interfere with the catcher? Does that mean back out of the way, remain in the box, etc.? If the answer is that it's up to the PU's discretion/judgement as to what is/isn't interference that's fine, but I would like to know what is typically considered to be a non-interference action by the batter.

Please understand my desire here is to better understand the rule in order to instruct players (yes, I'm one of those evil coaches). I'm not going to trot this post thread out during a game (i.e., my intent is to better understand the game and its rules, not get "ammo" for some future argument).

Thanks again for all your comments, they are appreciated.