Catcher Interference on aborted bunt attempt?

[UmpJM]

Mike,

So, the question is, what do you call if the batter legitimately pulls his bat back after squaring to bunt - late enough that there is no way that he's going to try to swing and with no intent to contact the catcher - and the bat and the catcher's mitt come into contact?

Let's say a runner is attempting to advance on the play.

No intent by either player and the batter has had and unilaterally declined his opportunity to offer at the pitch.

What's the call and why?

JM

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

Mike,

So, the question is, what do you call if the batter legitimately pulls his bat back after squaring to bunt - late enough that there is no way that he's going to try to swing and with no intent to contact the catcher - and the bat and the catcher's mitt come into contact?

Let's say a runner is attempting to advance on the play.

No intent by either player and the batter has had and unilaterally declined his opportunity to offer at the pitch.

What's the call and why?

JM

John, I thought I addressed this a few posts ago.

He simply declined to bunt. He is still entitled to a full swing and the catcher prevented that from happening. Further, I have seen guys square, a brush back pitch ensues, tha catcher rises as the batter spins away with his bat striking the catcher's mitt. Each time, the PU sends him to first. The onus is on the catcher, if no intent is displayed by the batter. That call comes from J/R, page and rule noted several times.

If I am the defensive coach, I may not like it but the catcher is required to let him hit the ball until it arrives in foul territory. Even then, the catcher must not impede the batter's opportunity to strike at a pitch. Again, that comes from the ruling in the current J/R. CI is not an immediate dead ball so the runner advances at his own risk.

[UmpJM]

Mike,

To repost your quote from J/R:

...It is not catcher's interference if the batter has completely given up his opportunity to swing at a pitch. ...

J/R explicitly says it is NOT CI.

JM

[MikeStrybel]

Okay John, I missed the clairvoyancy lessons in pro school years ago. During that microsecond that the batter pulls his back from a square, I will give him the benefit of the doubt when his bat is contacted by the catcher's mitt. I have seen far too many guys show bunt only to pull back and try a chop swing at the ball, mostly pitchers or guys struggling at the plate. I have seen more than a few get spun by a brush back while squaring and be interfered with by the catcher. If a catcher sticks his mitt into the zone and the bat is hit, I penalize the catcher, unless I see intent from the batter. You are free to penalize the batter or ignore the contact, as you see fit.

A batter does not give up his opportunity to swing at a pitch simply because he pulls back from a bunt. A bunt is not a swing. They are defined and treated very differently. I know that you know this. J/R says that the opportunity to swing must be abandoned. It is not in your play.

I'm taking my son to the batting cage now. He has his final regular season game tomorrow night and I want to see him do well. I think I get more grey hairs watching him pitch than bat, but a Dad always likes to see his son round first safely.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

Okay John, I missed the clairvoyancy lessons in pro school years ago. During that microsecond that the batter pulls his back from a square, I will give him the benefit of the doubt when his bat is contacted by the catcher's mitt. I have seen far too many guys show bunt only to pull back and try a chop swing at the ball, mostly pitchers or guys struggling at the plate. I have seen more than a few get spun by a brush back while squaring and be interfered with by the catcher. If a catcher sticks his mitt into the zone and the bat is hit, I penalize the catcher, unless I see intent from the batter. You are free to penalize the batter or ignore the contact, as you see fit.

A batter does not give up his opportunity to swing at a pitch simply because he pulls back from a bunt. A bunt is not a swing. They are defined and treated very differently.

I'm taking my son to the batting cage now. He has his final regular season game tomorrow night and I want to see him do well. I think I get more grey hairs watching him pitch than bat, but a Dad always likes to see his son round first safely.

It doesn't take clairvoyance... and at this point I think you're just being difficult. Use the OP video as an example if you need... but the question here is whether if IN YOUR JUDGEMENT as PU the batter is not going to swing after pulling a bunt back - is it still CI. The video is actually perfect for this - the only way we could judge, with relative certainty, that the batter is not going to swing is when the bunt pullback is coming back just barely ahead of the pitch itself.

I don't think anyone here is disagreeing that if the batter pulls back a bunt significantly earlier than this, with timing such that a swing is possible, and contacts the catcher - it IS CI. The disagreement comes when it is rather obvious there's no time for a swing.