Catchers Interference
 

Greetings,
I have been lurking on this forum for awhile, and found the knowledge and assistance rendered here invaluable on many occasions. I have a question about catchers interference. I have been around baseball for a long time, and we all know that catchers interference is a rare occurrence, usually caused by an inexperienced catcher or one that sets up poorly.

A player (the batter) in a men's league is getting catchers interference calls regularly, almost in each game he participates in and sometimes two times in a game. The umpires are now aware of this, and regularly check to see if he is in the batters box. The catchers in these games are in a normal position, and since this is not called on any previous or subsequent batters the interference calls are an anomaly. In watching this particular hitter, he appears not to stride forward and actually seems to go back when he swings. Whether he is intentionally attempting to hit the catchers glove is not easily ascertained.

My question:
Is there are a rule (or interpretation of a rule) that takes care of this issue, and if not how would you guys approach this problem?

2008 BRD §269: Batter attempts to create catcher interference
Official Interp (Fitzpatrick): The batter may not deliberately attempt to create a catcher's interference call. Penalty: The ball is dead, strike, and runners do not advance. If the swing hits the catcher, the umpire shall eject the batter. No out is charged unless the batter has two strikes.

Thank you. But what if his unorthodox swing simply takes him back into the catchers box? What are the parameters (if any) involving the batters swing (not his feet mind you) in regards to this?

batter should change his unorthodox swing. one ejection and i'm sure it won't happened anymore. any swing worth a crap shouldn't have a hitter extending that far back in the swing.

I am not penalizing a batter for his unorthodox swing, unless he is INTENTIONALLY trying to create CI.

Its up to the catcher to not create INT, not the batter to have to avoid the catcher's glove in his swing.

I'd have to see his swing to see what exactly he was doing, but something REALLY funky would have to be going on for me to call a strike and eject instead of CI.

HTBT.

Tuss has it right: you must judge that the INT is intentional before you call this. The interp actually has a note that you must be "certain," which seems to be a higher standard than most calls.

Correct...but the player would argue that either way that his swing is "unorthodox" but whether or not a hitter's swing is as crappy as that, (assuming the swing really is that bad) he won't be playing much anyway.