Only in Little League

[Forest Ump]

I agree with Johnny. If I'm envisioning this as the OP put it, batter interference. Batter (not B/R) out, R1 back to 1st.

[GA Umpire]

Originally Posted by Forest Ump

I agree with Johnny. If I'm envisioning this as the OP put it, batter interference. Batter (not B/R) out, R1 back to 1st.

Agreed. As soon as he stepped out of the box and INT with F2's throw [even though it wasn't intentional], he violated 6.06(c). It doesn't say how far from the plate he can be for this to not apply. He is still the batter and INT with F2's play.

[bossman72]

Guys,

Would your call be any different if it was a dropped 3rd strike with less than 2 outs (BR is not entitled to advance here as well)?

[GA Umpire]

Originally Posted by bossman72

Guys,

Would your call be any different if it was a dropped 3rd strike with less than 2 outs (BR is not entitled to advance here as well)?

Yes, my call would be different. Now, he runs the risk of R1 being out b/c of a "retired" player causes INT. Basically, in a spot where he is not entitled to run, puts him at risk of being ruled INT and someone is out since a play is being attempted.

[jdmara]

You cannot fault the defense for an offensive player not being where they are suppose to be. You have to call interference on this (in most cases). Depending on the age of the kids however, I might call time right away (before the ball is even thrown) to get the wayward batter back to the plate

-Josh

[aceholleran]

Originally Posted by bossman72

Guys,

Would your call be any different if it was a dropped 3rd strike with less than 2 outs (BR is not entitled to advance here as well)?

Yes, because he is a legit batter-runner.

Ace

[aceholleran]

Great debate guys--with most people staying on topic. I am going to try to ascertain a better description of the sitch ... and how arbiter ruled on it.

Sorry the OP was a bit hazy. Thought 'twould be best to simply cut-and-paste.

Ace in CT

[LMan]

SDS, et al, have the correct interp on this play. That is all.