The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jun 25, 2009, 11:05am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve View Post
Yes, that qualifies as "any movement that hinders." I said that if he stands still in the box, he is safe from interfering. If he steps backwards and moves into the catcher's way, then he is either leaving the box, or making a movement to interfere. Either way, that is interference.
You just made dash's case. Everything you said here is correct, and none of it mentions the batter's intent. What he does and whether that hinders are the relevant considerations.
__________________
Cheers,
mb
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jun 25, 2009, 11:31am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by GA Umpire View Post
Then, what would be considered to be "unusual" if it wasn't done intentionally? Such as, if the batter lets go of the bat, it is not "unusual" to let go of the bat with 1 hand. But, it would be to let go of it and have it in front of the catcher.

Maybe intentional wasn't the right word. But still. Give me an example of something being INT not done intentional while still in the box. And, I don't mean INT with the catcher intentionally(which is where I messed up in not making this distinction earlier).
No intent necessary. It either caused int with the catchers throw or it didn't.

If the batter lets go of the bat and it caused the catcher to have a bad throw to any base, then we have int.

Batter swings so hard that the bat comes around and hits catcher as he is throwing the ball and making him drop it. Did the batter leave the box? NO. Did the batter intend to do this? We will never know but, he did do it and it caused int, therefore it is enforced (or at least should be).

Another example is when a batter swigs so hard his momentum carries him across the plate. At the time of the throw hie was technically still in the box, but at the completion he had to step over the plate to regain his balance.

Batter: "I didn't do that on purpose."
Umpire: "I never said you did but, your still out"
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jun 25, 2009, 11:38am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,057
Send a message via Yahoo to UmpJM
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by jicecone View Post
...

Batter swings so hard that the bat comes around and hits catcher as he is throwing the ball and making him drop it. Did the batter leave the box? NO. Did the batter intend to do this? We will never know but, he did do it and it caused int, therefore it is enforced (or at least should be).

...
jicecone,

I'm with you on the rest of it, but on this one, under OBR I've got "backswing" or "weak" interference - ball is dead, runners return, batter is NOT out (unless it was strike 3, of course).

JM
__________________
Finally, be courteous, impartial and firm, and so compel respect from all.
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jun 25, 2009, 11:41am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: West of Atlanta, GA
Posts: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by jicecone View Post

If the batter lets go of the bat and it caused the catcher to have a bad throw to any base, then we have int.
This is something better explained with actions than words.
Quote:
Batter swings so hard that the bat comes around and hits catcher as he is throwing the ball and making him drop it. Did the batter leave the box? NO. Did the batter intend to do this? We will never know but, he did do it and it caused int, therefore it is enforced (or at least should be).
Then, it is nothing in OBR at least and no outs are recorded. Only runners sent back.

Quote:
Another example is when a batter swigs so hard his momentum carries him across the plate. At the time of the throw hie was technically still in the box, but at the completion he had to step over the plate to regain his balance.

Batter: "I didn't do that on purpose."
Umpire: "I never said you did but, your still out"
Then, he left the box which is part of the BI rule.

What I meant is, if he is just standing in the box and does nothing other than standing there(minus any time to react and move out of the way), then no INT is called. But, if he does something "unusual" (as JM put it), then BI is called. And, if he does something "unusual" for this call, then it would probably have been done with some deliberation. Such as, he tosses his bat on Ball 4 and it hits the catcher's throw to F5. It was tossed deliberately thus his actions were deliberate. He INT accidentally but tossed the bat deliberately. If he ducked out of the way of the pitch and stood up afterwards, that would not be deliberate as much as it would be reactionary and no INT called. But, tossing the bat is more deliberate than reactionary.

That is all I meant. It is hard to explain what I meant in words. Much of this probably is better in person but I know how to call BI. I just don't know how I can better explain what I meant.
__________________
Question everything until you get an irrefutable or understandable answer...Don't settle for "That's Just the Way it is"
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jun 25, 2009, 01:02pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,716
Is it the same on backswing, weak interference? I wasn't sure. But wouldn't be the first time wrong here, (no books at work)

GA, understood!
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jun 25, 2009, 01:44pm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Lakeside, California
Posts: 6,724
Quote:
Originally Posted by GA Umpire View Post
Then, he left the box which is part of the BI rule.

What I meant is, if he is just standing in the box and does nothing other than standing there(minus any time to react and move out of the way), then no INT is called. But, if he does something "unusual" (as JM put it), then BI is called. And, if he does something "unusual" for this call, then it would probably have been done with some deliberation.
Exactly what I was trying to say. I fully realize that intent is NOT in the rule, but you can judge intent rather easily and interference while standing in the batters box is usually intentional, otherwise the batter would just stand there and be a good boy.
__________________
Matthew 15:14, 1 Corinthians 1:23-25
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jun 25, 2009, 01:51pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: West of Atlanta, GA
Posts: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve View Post
Exactly what I was trying to say. I fully realize that intent is NOT in the rule, but you can judge intent rather easily and interference while standing in the batters box is usually intentional, otherwise the batter would just stand there and be a good boy.
This isn't going to be a trend is it?
__________________
Question everything until you get an irrefutable or understandable answer...Don't settle for "That's Just the Way it is"
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jun 25, 2009, 01:53pm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Lakeside, California
Posts: 6,724
Quote:
Originally Posted by GA Umpire View Post
This isn't going to be a trend is it?
Yes, I'm afraid we will probably agree more than disagree on most things. And for what we don't, we will agree to disagree.
__________________
Matthew 15:14, 1 Corinthians 1:23-25
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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Throw -in.... MidMadness Basketball 12 Tue Dec 09, 2008 09:40pm
throw-in after double personal during free throw closetotheedge Basketball 26 Mon Dec 01, 2008 02:39am
3 man mechanic on sideline throw in below free throw line extended!!!! jritchie Basketball 10 Tue Nov 01, 2005 02:43pm
Throw-in spot after throw-in violation zebraman Basketball 6 Sun Dec 12, 2004 08:09pm
Throw-in mnterps Soccer 3 Wed Dec 08, 2004 10:12am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:05pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1