The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 14, 2002, 08:10am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 10
i am not an umpire, just a coach wanting to understand
the rules better and have found this board to be very
informative.

i also read another "rules" board and came across a question
that i was somewhat confused about. i tried searching the
database here and didn't find anything that fits the exact
description and would like some clarification, the following
was posted:

"Situation, Runner on first base breaks for second on pitch. As catcher retrives ball from his mitt to make a throw, it falls to the ground where it is immediatly struck (inadvertenly) by the batters bat and is knocked away from the catcher."

the poster was then asked to clarify if it was the backswing
that hit the ball out of the way, the original poster responded:

"Yes, the batter was returning the bat after a swing."

first, is this a definition of backswing to be included
with the follow-thru backswing?

second, what is the correct ruling for either case of
"backswing" given that the catcher dropped the ball when
taking the ball out of the glove for a throw and was then
struck by the batter's bat?

thanks,
-dave koch



__________________
keep your eye on the ball
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 14, 2002, 11:06am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 517
Quote:
Originally posted by davekoch


the poster was then asked to clarify if it was the backswing
that hit the ball out of the way, the original poster responded:

"Yes, the batter was returning the bat after a swing."

first, is this a definition of backswing to be included
with the follow-thru backswing?

thanks,
-dave koch



Dave,
The "backswing" refered to in the rules would be the follow through of the attempt to strike the ball.

If the batter has completed his attempt to strike the ball (and the attendant folow through/backswing) the movement to return the bat to a "preswing" position could be "any other movement" that could be ruled inteference. Note that I said could, and not would.

Its probably a HTBT situation. If the batter's movement were judged to be part of his normal attempt to strike the ball, and he remained in the batter's box, you might not judge it to be inteference. Particularly since F2 apparently let the ball get away from him in the first place, and therefor caused the ball to be in a place that caused the contact.

Roger Greene
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 14, 2002, 12:48pm
Rog Rog is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 289
Question

Please specify what league, i.e. High School, College, Little League, Babe Ruth, etc. and what rules are utilized in this game.

For the most part this is the ruling across the board -

http://www.cbs.sportsline.com/u/base...ers/rules6.htm

6.06 A batter is out for illegal action when_

(c) He interferes with the catcher's fielding or throwing by stepping out of
the batter's box or making any other movement that hinders the catcher's play
at home base.
EXCEPTION: Batter is not out if any runner attempting to advance is put out,
or if runner trying to score is called out for batter's interference. If the
batter interferes with the catcher, the plate umpire shall call
"interference." The batter is out and the ball dead. No player may advance on
such interference (offensive interference) and all runners must return to the
last base that was, in the judgment of the umpire, legally touched at the time
of the interference. If, however, the catcher makes a play and the runner
attempting to advance is put out, it is to be assumed there was no actual
interference and that runner is out_not the batter. Any other runners on the
base at the time may advance as the ruling is that there is no actual
interference if a runner is retired. In that case play proceeds just as if no
violation had been called. If a batter strikes at a ball and misses and swings
so hard he carries the bat all the way around and, in the umpire's judgment,
unintentionally hits the catcher or the ball in back of him on the backswing
before the catcher has securely held the ball, it shall be called a strike
only (not interference). The ball will be dead, however, and no runner shall
advance on the play.

__________________
"Enjoy the moment....."
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 14, 2002, 01:05pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 10
sorry, the poster from the other board did not
indicate league or rules.

even so, under 6.06(c) would the batter be ruled
as interfering if he was returning to his pre-swing
stance and the bat hit the ball which the catcher
had dropped after taking it out of the glove to make
the throw?

thanks,
-dave koch
__________________
keep your eye on the ball
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 14, 2002, 01:15pm
Rog Rog is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 289
Post

absent an "intentional" action by the batter, I fail to see why the batter should be penalized for the catcher's lack of control of the ball.

What if that same catcher drops the ball just as the plate umpire is stepping back to clear the catcher, and the ball lands on the umpire's foot. Then as the umpire moves, the ball is inadvertantly catapulted into foul territory. Would this be umpire interference?
__________________
"Enjoy the moment....."
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 14, 2002, 01:16pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Newburgh NY
Posts: 1,822
Originally posted by davekoch

sorry, the poster from the other board did not
indicate league or rules.

even so, under 6.06(c) would the batter be ruled
as interfering if he was returning to his pre-swing
stance and the bat hit the ball which the catcher
had dropped after taking it out of the glove to make
the throw?

thanks,
-dave koch


This falls under the category of umpire judgement, but in your scenario F2 had a chance to get R1, but erred meaning he dropped the ball getting it out of his mit., so the chance of F2 throwing out R1 (even if the ball hadn't hit the bat) is probably slim. Therefore, unless B1 did something deliberate after F2 dropped the ball, I have nothing.

At most one could rule weak interference meaning B1 is not out but R1 (now R2) is returned to first, however, F2 had a legitimate chance to get r1 but dropped the ball.

Pete Booth
__________________
Peter M. Booth
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 14, 2002, 01:31pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 10
thanks for the quick replies!

one last question on this situation, if the
umpire judges NO interference at all,
doesn't the ball stay live, even with inadvertent contact?

thanks a bunch for clearing this up for me,
-dave koch
__________________
keep your eye on the ball
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 14, 2002, 05:59pm
Rog Rog is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 289
Talking

No interference = balls still live.....
__________________
"Enjoy the moment....."
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 16, 2002, 05:31pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Idaho
Posts: 1,474
Catcher missed his opportunity. Batter, without intent, did nothing wrong. Strike. No interference call. Safe at 2nd. Ball is live.

NO rules violation anywhere; just a muffed throw
__________________
"There are no superstar calls. We don't root for certain teams. We don't cheat. But sometimes we just miss calls." - Joe Crawford
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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:39am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1