When to call catcher's interferance?
 

Completely pleading ignorance (now that it's been several hours and I've cooled off). Please educate me.

R1, one out, tie game, FED. Batter hits into a 6-4-3 DP to end the inning...or so it seemed. After the DP was turned and as the players are coming off the field, PU calls time and puts everyone back saying catcher's interference, that the bat clipped the mitt. Batter then gets back in the box and hits a double down the line on the next pitch scoring the runner from first.

Fans on one side was livid that catcher's interference was not called immediately, and a few fans for the other team told me they also disagreed with the call, but they'd take it.

So when is CI supposed to be called? Immediately as it happened or after the play? I was unsure and the folks back home are probably mad at me for not berating the ump on the air for waiting, but I said I was not sure when it is supposed to be called, saying if the result of the play that the CI happened was a base hit, there was no advantage and it wouldn't have mattered. But since there was an advantage with the DP, it probably had to be called then.

What say you?

Obstruction on the batter by the catcher is a delayed dead ball, so the play is allowed to be completed.
Did the umpire put the runners back on orginal bases and the batter continued his at bat?

Delayed dead ball, offense can take result of play or batter gets first base, all other runners advance if forced -- EDIT or if stealing.

1. In a FED game, this violation is called "catcher's obstruction" for the sake of consistency (obstruction is always on the defense, interference is usually on the offense).

2. As w_sohl points out, this is a "delayed dead ball," and that's true in every rule code. If the batter hits the ball despite the obstruction, we let the play continue (proper mechanic for PU would be the FED obstruction mechanic). If the BR or any runner fails to reach his advance base, we enforce the obstruction.

3. The penalty for obstruction is that the batter is awarded 1B, NOT brought back to the plate. Other runners advance if forced by the award or if they were stealing during the play, otherwise they stay put. 8-1-1(e)

4. The offense may choose the result of the play (proper procedure is to enforce the penalty but to grant a request to take the play -- not to offer the option to the coach). The offense might do that, for example, in a case like this: late innings, team at bat down by 1, R3, 1 out. Batter is obstructed but hits a slow roller to F6, who throws out BR, R3 scoring. The O-coach might prefer to have bases empty with 2 outs and a run scored (the result of the play) over R1 & R3 with 1 out (the result of enforcing the obstruction penalty).

It should be *called* immediately, but it's enforced at the end of playing action.

Often, no one notices the call, though.

Ah. So the error was not in not calling time for the obstruction but not putting the batter on first. Yeah, the PU put the batter back in the box, but the result of the next pitch helped the batting team more than putting the batter on first did.

Now I know for next time. Thanks, all.

I some how doubt that all (any of) the folks griping about the call new this, even though it is where the "fault" lies.

it should be called right away, but if you let the play happened, you can call it whenever...everybody's watching the ball anyway. It's not ideal, but I get annoyed when fans say "you have to call that right away.." not always. yes, that's when it should be called...but if you need a few more seconds to process what you think you heard...there's no harm in taking a couple more seconds.

It should never be "called" right away, you may give a non-verbal signal right away, but I am not calling anything till all playing action has stopped.

(I take "called" to mean a verbal indication)

Uh....no.

Make the "call" immediately to let everyone know you (who's paying attention) that you have CI. Signal but do not verbalize. When the playing action ends, give the verbal.

In a perfect world, as I said "should". Yes, that would be the correct way to do it.

The DDB signal lets those know that you have something. Lighten up folks...wound a little tight today

No you just have to choose your words more wisely. If officials that understand the rules are picking your words apart how do you think the OP, someone who is unsure of how the rules are enforced, is going to take your words?

good thing I'm not a journalism guy...i don't disagree w/ what you're saying...i'm obviously not as strong at articulating as others on here.

That's one thing I TRY to do is pay attention, widen my vision so to speak (type?). They put me at a table almost directly behind home plate. I was looking over the catcher's right shoulder to see the pitcher. And I still didn't see the PU motion the obstruction because I was following the ball. He may have, and probably did the mechanic. But even when doing radio, it amazes me how narrow my vision gets when the ball gets hit with the bat.

well, and sometimes you have to hear it...you don't always see it.

What is wrong with pointing and saying "that's interference, obstruction (for FED)?" That is what I have been taught. Every other rule infraction on the diamond is made with a verbal and non-verbal signal (safe mechanic, point , whatever). If the players stop due to me calling a rule infraction, so be it. My job is to recognize the infraction.

Are people still using the DDB signal? Really?

I agree on the verbal and the signal call. And, the DDB signal is still in the FED manual, so, yes, it's used in areas (not all areas) around the country.

That's how I was taught as well. I will verbalize, but not using my "kill the play" voice the way I do with a balk. Usually just loud enough so that the coaches think, "what did he say?" :)

I do the DDB mechanic for about 2 seconds. I don't run around the field with my arm hanging out.

Ci
 

FED:I had the same call. 1st inning B2 is at bat, R2. High pitch comes in I watch the bat clip the glove and B2 pops up. I signal and stated 'That's Obstruction!' F6 catches the pop-up and U1 signals Out. I call time and ask the VC if he wants the CI or the results of the play.

He chose the CI and I placed B@ on 1st base.

The HC comes out ans requests time to discuss what I had called. I explained that I had CI and that the VC was choosing CI over the results of the play. The HC turns to F2 and F2 states it never happened. The HC looks at me and says 'That's an awfull call!' I state Coach we have concluded this conversation. I turn to go back to the plate and the HC yells out 'THAT'S A HORRIBLE CALL' I returned to the HC and state "Coach you are restricted to the bench, I don't want to hear you or see you for the rest of the game.'

The visiting teams wins in the seventh when the home team could not come from behind.

Should just signal, and then after play ends announce the catchers interference/obstruction and make the award. It is the coaches responsibility to advise you if he wants the play to stand. If he says nothing, we play on with the award. Not going to coach for him. Not going to tell a coach he can appeal a missed base either...:D

FED: 8.1.1E ...The coach or captain of the team at bat, after being informed by the UIC of the OBS, shall indicate whether or not he elects to decline the OBS penalty and accept the resulting play.

To elect or decline, you have to be asked, IMO.

Read the rule again...your call is informing the team of the CI. That's it...I believe there are case plays that support what the other posters are saying. Are we off base with that? The coach needs to know that he has the option...we're not obligated to walk him through it.

What's the issue with...
 

with letting the coach know what his options are? We aren't "coaching" him on what to do, we are just saying it's either A or B, he still has to make the decision.

I discussed this exact situation with Hunter Wendelstedt and he gave a great reply:

Evans also teaches that it's not an umpire's job to tell the coach when he has an option.

On catcher's interference/obstruction, the correct mechanic is to (a) wait until the play ends; if the BR and each runner reaches his advance base, then ignore the CI/CO, and (b) if not, then enforce the award, unless the coach asks to take the play.

Do not ask the coach what he wants.

I had a call a couple week ago where I explained my call to the coach and he proceeded to tell me that I didn't give him a thorough enough of an explanation...I wanted to say, but didn't, "I'm here to umpire a baseball game, not conduct a rules clinic. My explanation to you was the correct explanation. If you still disagree with my decision, feel free to protest the game." If not, we're playing on.

mbyron,

While the Evans instruction is certainly appropriate for professional play, both Roder and Childress recommend offering the option to the coach in amateur play.

That is the practice I follow.

JM

It's probably appropriate to do that at many amateur levels. What's good about it...IMO, is that an umpire correctly ruling on that play will hopefully educate the players and coaches in their future games that they have the option...once they know that, the future umpires might not have to explain it again.