The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 13, 2002, 08:03am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 11
Little League Major Boys. BR hits ball then bat hits catcher's glove. Is this still catcher's Interference?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 13, 2002, 08:43am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 813
I have a difficult time envisioning how this could occur.

If somehow the bat hit the ball and the then the catcher's glove during the batter's forward swing, I would rule it catcher's interference.

If, however, the bat hit the ball, continued on the follow through around the batter's body, and then contacted the catcher's glove behind the batter's back, I would not rule that as catcher's interference.


Just my opinion,

Freix

Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 13, 2002, 09:31am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 201
??? Pitch must have been WAY inside or your pitcher has a seriously wicked curve. Sounds like a "magic bullet" pitch.

If the catcher's mitt comes in contact with the bat during the act of hitting (not on the follow through as Freix mentioned) then it's inteference regardless of whether the ball was hit first or not.

Can you give more detail? I'm really curious how this happened.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 13, 2002, 09:34am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 38
I had a similar one last year, batter hit dribbler in front of plate, big one handed back swing, hits catcher in back of his head. I called interference, batter out. Batter and his Dad did not take it well.
__________________
DVM
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 13, 2002, 01:12pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 11
I umpire and Manage in minor League and Coach in Majors. At one of our games the opposing Manager tried to tell the umpire that the bat hit the ball before it hit the glove and therefore wasn't catcher's interference. I thought it was but wasn't sure. Thank You for your replies.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 13, 2002, 09:42pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,716
David Van Milligen:

"I had a similar one last year, batter hit dribbler in front of plate, big one handed back swing, hits catcher in back of his head. I called interference, batter out. Batter and his Dad did not take it well."

Could you please explain why that was batter interference?
Mabey Im missing something.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 13, 2002, 10:15pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 38
"Could you please explain why that was batter interference?
Mabey Im missing something."



If he had controlled his bat, and not knocked the catcher to the ground, the catcher had an easy play on him. His interference does not have to be intentional.
__________________
DVM
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 13, 2002, 10:41pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 276
6.06(c): Clarification:

If a batter strikes at a ball and misses
and swings so hard that he carries the
bat all the way around and, in the
umpire's judgment, unintentionally hits
the catcher before the catcher has securely
held the ball, it shall be called a
strike only (not interfernece). The ball
will be dead, and no runner shall advance
on the play.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 13, 2002, 10:58pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 276
I realize that my last post did not refer
to a batted ball, but to a swing and miss.

In the case of a batted ball, the interference
still has to be intentional per 7.09(h):

If, in the judgment of the umpire, a batter-
runner willfully and deliberately interferes
with a batted ball or a FIELDER in the act of
fielding a batted ball, with the obvious
intent to break up a double play, the ball is
dead: the umpire shall call the BR out for the
interference, and also the runner closest to
home plate.

The play described by David did not sound
intentional to me. A warning and/or ejection
may be in order (sort of like if a batter
dangerously throws his bat after hitting the ball)
but probably not the interference call.


Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:17pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1