On-Deck Batter Interference

I was PU today for a 13-14 yo Pony game (OBR). One out with R3 when pitcher throws a WP which careens off backstop towards the on-deck batter who reaches down with his bat and taps the ball back to the catcher who is chasing after it. I called TIME! THAT'S INTERFERENCE and called the batter out. Was that the correct call? Doesn't there always have to be an out on interference with the offense. Should R3 have been called out instead with less than 2 out?

If no base runners or R3 and 2 outs, should the call be different?

[PeteBooth]

Originally posted by Prince

I was PU today for a 13-14 yo Pony game (OBR). One out with R3 when pitcher throws a WP which careens off backstop towards the on-deck batter who reaches down with his bat and taps the ball back to the catcher who is chasing after it. I called TIME! THAT'S INTERFERENCE and called the batter out. Was that the correct call? Doesn't there always have to be an out on interference with the offense. Should R3 have been called out instead with less than 2 out?

If no base runners or R3 and 2 outs, should the call be different?

In this situation the on-deck batter (tapping ball back to F2) is probably helping F2 more than hindering F2 unless F2 was about to pick up ball and then he tapped it in a different direction.

Since we have a wild throw, we need INTENT on the part of the on-deck batter and also was the on-deck batter where he /she can reasonably be expected to be.

The on-deck batter should have left the ball alone, but he actually aided F2 on this one, so at best I would rule "weak interference" meaning put R3 back at third and B1 is up with whatever count he /she had. No outs recorded.


The applicable rule is as follows but as mentioned sounds like the on-deck batter was actually helping out F2 and not hindering him from making a play.

Since your judgement was interference, it's TIME! Interference and r3 is out. All other runners return, B1 up at bat with whatever count he/she had.

OBR 7.11 The players, coaches or any member of an offensive team shall vacate any space (including both dugouts) needed by a fielder who is attempting to field a batted or thrown ball.
PENALTY: Interference shall be called and the batter or runner on whom the play is being made shall be declared out.

Since the play was being made on r3, you call that runner out.

Pete Booth

[Bfair]

The appropriate rule is 3.15, interference by a person authorized to be on the field. Since the person "intentionally" interfered with the ball, it is an immediate dead ball, and the umpire should impose whatever is necessary to nullify the act of the interference.

If no runner were advancing, then there's really nothing to nullify. If a runner was advancing and the catcher was chasing the ball to make a play, then you should allow the advance unless you felt the interference caused the catcher not to obtain an out a base. Tapping the ball toward the catcher likely aided his efforts. Still, if there is that legitimate possibililty the catcher could have retired a runner if not for this interference, then the benefit of doubt should go to the defense----they did nothing to cause the interference issue.

If two runners were advancing, and you felt that the action of the on-deck batter stopped the catcher from making a play, then call out whichever batter you felt the catcher could have or would have retired. If unsure, then call out the runner closest to home, but allow the other to advance. It's unlikely the catcher would have retired BOTH runners had the interference not occurred.

It's very possible, however, that the correct call is that nothing is changed from the actual happenings of the play. You are not required to call a member of the offense out, nor are you required to return anyone to a base. You use your judgment to nullify the act of interference.

Had the ball rebounded off the foot of an inattentive on-deck batter, thus affecting the play, no penalty would be imposed. Although the interference at that point may have affected the play, it was unintentional, and the on-deck batter is allowed to be on the field per rule.

In any event, declaring the batter out in your situation was without a doubt the wrong call unless the on-deck batter were to have interfered with a fielder's attempt to catch a fly ball that would have retired the batter.


Just my opinion,

Freix

[brandda]

Not sure about OBR, but using LL rules, I would call it like this:

Assuming that there was no intent on the part of the on deck to keep the pitcher from fielding the ball, and his actions did not materially impact the play, I would rule this the same way as if there had been spectator interference. Dead ball, no one is out and runners who had not reached base prior to the interference return to their base of origin.

If you judge that there was intent by the on deck to interfere do whatever you need to do to remove any advantage gained. This still means that the runner gets sent back, but unless the batter or the runner was the cause of the interference no one is out. Bsed on what I have read below, the OBR rule may be different, but that would be my call.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by brandda
Not sure about OBR, but using LL rules, I would call it like this:

Assuming that there was no intent on the part of the on deck to keep the pitcher from fielding the ball, and his actions did not materially impact the play, I would rule this the same way as if there had been spectator interference. Dead ball, no one is out and runners who had not reached base prior to the interference return to their base of origin.

Good answer, except that's not the penalty for spectator interference. Spectator interference is one of the "God" rules -- the umpire gets to play God, determine what would have happened had there been no interference, then make that happen.

[brandda]

"Good answer, except that's not the penalty for spectator interference. Spectator interference is one of the "God" rules -- the umpire gets to play God, determine what would have happened had there been no interference, then make that happen."

I just went back and reread this and you are correct. My apologies, but of course it alos simplifies the situation dramatically.

BTW - How do you get a previous post to show up demarcated and bolded on here?

[Jim Porter]

Originally posted by brandda
BTW - How do you get a previous post to show up demarcated and bolded on here?

Click on the "Quote" button at the bottom of the post you want to quote.