Catcher's Obstruction (Interference)

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser
Warren,

Steve is right. A hit-and-run play is when the runner runs on the pitch, like a steal attempt. On this you would award the advance base on catcher's interference.

You are ignoring the messenger regardless of the message.

Rich

*sigh* You too have missed the point, Rich. I said that a play where the runner did not make a legitimate attempt to advance until after the batter struck the pitch would certainly be a hit-and-run play. It would. That's not to say that hit-and-run play's cannot begin much earlier ie. after the pitching motion has commenced. But a play that began so late most certainly would be a hit-and-run play ... quite literally!

Freix just disagrees to be disagreeable. He is bound and determined to prove his hypothesis that I know nothing about baseball. Please don't become his unwitting dupe in that fruitless endeavour, Rich.

And, yes, you are correct ... I most certainly am "ignoring the messenger regardless of the message." Considering the foul suggestions he has previously made toward me, I feel well within my rights to do so. I would LOVE to have answered some of his more inane criticisms of my recent posts, but I have no intention of giving him that satisfaction.

Bottom line: Does it actually have to be a squeeze play or steal to award the advance base on CI? I agree the answer to that, at least on a practical level, is clearly "No". All that is required is for the runner to have made a legitimate attempt to advance some time before the ball is batted into play, IMHO.

Cheers