Ignore or not

[Umpmazza]

this is a classic HTBT play.. if the umpire judged the batter threw it down with intent to hit the bat, then he is out... but if not intentional, batter runner is safe until he is put out.

[BretMan]

Rule 7 applies to a batter.

Rule 8 applies to a batter-runner.

Since this play involved a batter-runner, any rule or ruling you want to hang your hat on should come from section 8 of the rule book.

[DG]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

How do you figure that the "discarded" (i.e., THROWN, as I've never seen a batter gently lay his bat down to "discard" it, and I can safely ascertain that the OP meant "thrown") bat didn't hinder the catcher? It knocked the ball a couple of feet farther away from the catcher, who then had to rush his throw as a result. Perhaps there needs to be intent, but from subsequent info provided, it appears that this coach has his players intentionally interfere on a regular basis, so there's a good possibility that the hindrance of the catcher was intentional.

You read between the lines too much. Discarded does not mean thrown. The op did not say catcher had a problem or rushed his throw. Subsequent info was not in evidence for the original op, or the ump who had to rule. PU must rule on what he saw, not what he found out later. If he saw it as intentional then INT. If the discard contact was not intentional in his view, then no INT. If you do not factor intent you penalize offense for defensive mistake, remember wild pitch.

I have seen a lot of discarded bats after a 3rd strike swing at a pitch in the dirt that were not thrown at a loose wild pitch.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by DG

You read between the lines too much. Discarded does not mean thrown. The op did not say catcher had a problem or rushed his throw. Subsequent info was not in evidence for the original op, or the ump who had to rule. PU must rule on what he saw, not what he found out later. If he saw it as intentional then INT. If the discard contact was not intentional in his view, then no INT. If you do not factor intent you penalize offense for defensive mistake, remember wild pitch.

I have seen a lot of discarded bats after a 3rd strike swing at a pitch in the dirt that were not thrown at a loose wild pitch.

There is a strong probability that it was intentional. Even though the evidence was not in place in the OP, the coach was notorious for teaching his batters to intentionally interfere. That's what I was basing it on. If the PU judges the intent, then it would be INT. Let's put it this way: Had I been the umpire, and thought for one second that the batter-runner interfered intentionally, I would have called INT.

[DG]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

There is a strong probability that it was intentional. Even though the evidence was not in place in the OP, the coach was notorious for teaching his batters to intentionally interfere. That's what I was basing it on. If the PU judges the intent, then it would be INT. Let's put it this way: Had I been the umpire, and thought for one second that the batter-runner interfered intentionally, I would have called INT.

I would have also, if for one second thought it was intentional. But the Op gave no indication.

[SAump]

Originally Posted by umpire99

After the inning the coach of the batting team told me that he teaches his players to casually drop the bat in the direction of the ball. He said that the bat often either hits the ball or hinders the F2 and that they never get called for interference.

Later in the same game, the same batter hit a ball down the left field line. I was tracking the ball, but found out later (from an evaluator in the stands) that the batter flung his bat toward the catcher as he left for first base. The catcher seemed to be a little shook up, but nobody ever brought it to my attention. The evaluator said it was obvious to him that it was intentional, but that I was doing the correct thing by looking at the ball as it went into left field.

Classic. Coach teaching kids to drop the bat behind the plate. I would have immediate interference with the catcher, but I have never seen that done before.

I'm not too sure if you're either that quick to step out from behind the plate like that or too deaf/blind not to hear/see a bat strike the catcher. I would not want to miss that call.

[SAump]

Originally Posted by Highest Quality

Oh my, I have hundreds of times.

Did the batter bend over to remove his lower leg guard?

[SAump]

Originally Posted by Umpmazza

this is a classic HTBT play.. if the umpire judged the batter threw it down with intent to hit the bat, then he is out... but if not intentional, batter runner is safe until he is put out.

Impossible!

[RPatrino]

The batter drops bat and the ball rolls into it, I have nothing. The batter throws the bat and hits the ball, in flight or on the ground, I have interference.

[RPatrino]

Which specific batter? You are kidding right?