![]() |
Batter Interference
Hey guys had situation the other night. Runner on 1st and 3rd 1 out. Passed ball runner from 3rd attempting to score. Cathers throw to the plate hits batter. I'm out in the field, plate umpire makes no call except runner from 3rd is safe. I ask for a meeting with plate umpire and tell him I believe we have interference on the batter. He asks "what do you mean" I replay the play to him and he agrees the batter interfeared. So I tell him I'm not 100% on this but I believe since there is less than 2 outs runner on third is out and runner from 1st which is now on 3rd goes back to 1st? He says I think runner would have been safe so I'm not calling the interference. I told him you only disregard the interfrenece if the runner is out! So we make no call on interference! No coaches or players screamed or anything, but, I dont think they new what really happened I have to believe plate umpire is wrong on this. What do you guys think???????
Kleff |
Quote:
|
Quote:
(And, I agree, you should only provide input on this play if asked.) |
If the batter has time to vacate the area, he better vacate the area. I've even yelled that at him ("Get out of the way!"). I can sell interference a lot better if he's still standing there and, in my judgement, interferes with the play. Of course, there's always that bad throw from the catcher that hits that batter....but that's another post. :rolleyes:
JJ |
I agree, provide information and if your partner chooses not to make the call, there is not much you can do except explain the rules to him after the game, because he made both of you look bad.
Then again, not having been there, it is kind of difficult to understand if the batter was in the way of the throw or the catcher just had a bad throw. |
The only reason I asked for a conference with plate umpire, was initially someone from the defensive team yelled "is'nt that interference". Plate umpire looked to me like he did'nt understand why. He actually started walking out to me. Well anyway the batter was about 3 feet outside the batters box down the on the 3rd base side. Runner from 3rd probably would have been safe,but it still would have been close enough to call
|
Kleff, did the plate guy ask for your input by calling time and motioning for you to talk with him? I mean, maybe he was looking at you wondering what you were up to? If not, stay where you are!!
How did that batter interfere with the play from where he was standing? IF the catcher could get an interference call by plugging the batter with the ball they would do it everytime, no? |
Quote:
Was the batter in the line from the catcher to the pitcher covering or did the throw suck? |
Quote:
Here's my answer as an umpire evaluator & trainer. Your partner did not ask for help. Keep your mouth shut and move on. |
Why would the plate guy be wondering what I was doing???? I was in the c slot. Plate guy started walking towards me in the c slot, that is when I called time and asked him to talk. the conversation took place closer to the c slot than home plate. By him coming out that far I figured he was looking for imput. The PB went toward the 3rd base side batter was deffinetly in the way of throw. The catcher was throwing towards home plate.
|
Quote:
If the coach asks you, you tell the coach to talk to the umpire that made the call. |
Hey guys I think you totally misunderstood what was being asked! I was looking for rule clarification not umpire mechanics! I am well aware of when to ask for help and when to give help. Instead of bashing an umpire give your understanding of the rule. If your clueless on the rule just admit it. Anyway I got call back from an umpire of 40 plus years who actually knows the rulebook, not a few clowns on a forum who think they know the rule book. He says without seeing the play it sounds like interference under rule 7.09 c. Now I know better to just wait for a callback from a umpire with rulebook knowledge rather than posting to this forum!
|
~Cripes~
Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
|
Quote:
Tim. |
So it's not just on the basketball forum that new guys will post here and expect to be able to dictate the direction of the thread? That's good to know.
The pattern holds form here, too. 1. New guy posts a question. 2. Question gets answered and more advice is provided than was asked for. 3. New guy defends himself against the added advice. 4. New guy comes back and denegrates officials (umpires) who offered said advice. 5. New guy stomps off with his feelings hurt. |
Another 6 post expert, sheezzzeee.....
|
My feelings did not get hurt, just wanting a ruling on the play itself. No one seemed to have an answer. In my original post I did not give every little detail of how the meeting started. I sort of thought that was besides the point. I was just wanting to have someone point me in the right direction in the rule book if they could which obviously they could'nt. I am the one who called time, while the plate ump was walking out to the c slot. He obviously wanted to talk about the play. I did speak first and said I think we have interference, only loud enough for him to hear I told him what I thought, he went with his original call. Like I said just looking for rule clarification, it just did'nt seem like the right call is all I was saying.
|
Kleff, you know the rule, and you have read it. You are asking us if it 'sounds' like interference based on what you have written. We have responded with a resounding, maybe. But, we need more info. You said you thought it was intereference. Please explain why in more detail.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Interference with a thrown ball must be intentional, and intentional can include "willful indifference." If that's what happened, it was interference. If not, it likely wasn't. And, your OP also included, "I ask for a meeting," so that's what many of us were responding to. |
Quote:
1. Did the batter interfere with a play at the plate? 2. What is the penalty if he did? Issue 2 is easy to answer: with less than 2 out, the runner trying to score would be out (and the other runner would return). Issue 1 is harder to answer because the correct answer depends on many factors. But whether the runner "would have been safe" is NEVER a criterion for determining interference. If the batter had time to move out of the way and F2 made a quality throw and the batter's movement interfered with the play at the plate, then I'd rule INT. OTOH, if he was away from the plate area and not on a line between F2 and the plate and the throw hit him, I would say that he had not hindered the play. Then the call would be no interference, live ball, play on. Interference calls are very difficult to rule on without video or a very comprehensive account of the play. I agree with other posters that the mechanics described in this play were incorrect. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Hey guys sorry if I offended any of you with my comments earlier. Just got a little frustated, could'nt understand how the thread took a total different direction. I will give step by step what happened and what I was thinking at the time
1 out runners on 1st and 3rd, passed ball, ball goes of catcher a to the left, runner from 3rd tries to score, batter steps out of box anout 3 feet, he does not realize ball is behind him, catcher throwns to pitcher covering, from where I was (c-slot) it looks to be pretty much on target. ball hits batter.Plate ump (PU) calls runner safe, I thought it was interference but did not say anything. a coach yells is'nt that interference, PU has look on his face like something weird just happened starts walking out to me,I call time (IMO calling the meeting), I meet him just in front of mound on 3rd base side, He did not ask for help, but by walking out there right after that play I sorta figured that is why he was coming out,I spoke first and said "it looks like interference to me", I say runner on 3rd should be out runner on 1st should go back. He say's"I think he would have been safe so thats how I'm going to call it,I say "it's your call ,but I don't believe thats right" I will be more open to negative feedback from now on, If my mechanics were out of line in this situation I'll accept that. Once again sorry to offend, I will try to give more info from now on Mike |
Okay, here's a rule question from a basketball guy.
Isn't intent required for interference in this play? If the batter didn't know where the ball was, how could he have intended to interfere? |
I will echo what has already been said here. 1) You do not come in an intiate a conference on your partners call. It is up to him to go for help if he feels he needs it. I do not understand how you could feel you had a better perspective on a play at the plate than PU. 2) To call interference on a play like you have attempted to describe, your partner, not you , needs to be 100% positive that interference has occurred. Again, as some of the veterans here have suggested, read the rule book, and the PBUC mechanics book also. This should help you in the future
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
SDS gave you the right rule reference.7.11 for OBR. The batter is treated as offensive personnel on the field when there is a pass ball or wild pitch. He must try to avoid the play and not intentionally interfere. Did he try to avoid? Did he do it intentionally? There in lies your answer.
|
Quote:
The batter has nothing better to do here than to pay attention to where the ball is and to get out of the way. If he fails to do so, he's guilty of interference whether or not he intentionally hinders the defense. |
Quote:
|
Food for thought...
1. As the Plate Umpire, if you think the batter may wind up involved in the play, in one way or the other, do you toss him out of the way? Or do nothing? 2. As the Base Umpire, if your certain of interference on this play, do you call it right away, even if your partner misses it? If your partner calls it, do you echo it? 3. Is there an order of importance between proper mechanics and rules knowledge? Or is it just a matter of "get-it-right"? My opinion... somebody with rules knowledge, but no mechanics training, cannot effectively umpire(Tim McCarver). Somebody with proper mechanics training, but poor rules knowledge, can generally get by longer. 4. What the heck is "the c-slot"? This should be fun for all you perverts. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Steve I think that is a safe assumption. Mr. Multiple Personalities must've returned.
|
Thanks to everyone who responded, I still a little unsure how I will rule in the future based on some of these answers(batters intnent, bad throw from catcher will haveto play apart) I'll have to read 7.09c and 7.11a little closer
In hindsight I guess I should have waited for PU to ask me my opinion before I offered mine. I guess the only person who really knows why he was walking out there would be the PU himself?? Once again I apoligize for my post yesterday Thanks Mike |
Quote:
|
Quote:
"... in person and more so" ?? " ... the answers which appear" ?? ... Answers that are "less than flexible" ?? |
Why are my questions "full of crap"?
1. When is it appropriate to move a player out of the way of an impending play? 2. Is there a different level of importance between mechanics and rules? 3. Is it correct to call interference even is it's not in you coverage? 4. Does anybody left around here have a sense of humor? And SDS, if the only thing you have to say is I'm full of crap, please refrain from joining the conversation. This is an Umpire Forum, not Anti-Umpire Forum. I've posed legitimate questions that I think can get a good conversation going. If I asked you one of these questions after one of the 300 (yes 300) games I do a year, and you told me I'm full of crap, I think we'd have a problem. Now cut the crap and stop bashing everybody that has a question. And no, I'm not anybody else on this forum. |
yo...blue,
Quote:
Once you make an assertion that absurd, nobody is going to take what you say seriously. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
JM |
Quote:
1. Never. Players play, umpires umpire. Let coaches coach. 2. No. Both are prerequisites. To bake bread, you need both flour and an oven. 3. Rarely. How can you be certain that all the elements of interference were present when your partner, whose call it was and who had a better view of it than you, didn't call it? The chances are better that you will get it wrong than your partner, and the egg on your face will smell rotten. 4. Yes. |
Quote:
Otherwise, I generally agree with the other posters. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
How many associations do you need to join to do 300 games a year?
|
Quote:
|
I've lived in areas in which one association assigned FED, youth ball, Legion, MABL and JC. 300 games could be worked if one really wanted to.
I've also worked in areas in which associations were "specialized" and assigned only one level of ball. Impossible to work 300 games there. Then, there's the Lance Cokalinski method of working on your own to get the "big games." I think Lance worked over 500 games one year in addition to holding clinics and camps. |
Quote:
Hey, I have an idea about unemployment... |
Quote:
If the batter does not vacate the area, when he could have, just kind of stood there dumbfounded, he can be called for INT if he was where he should not be if he had any awareness of what was going on. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:13am. |