Strange Happenings

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

Another rule that FED needs to change. Sometimes the situation calls for an automatic do-over (except for the pitch). An out is too harsh.

Agreed.

At least in this case the result would be the same since it was strike 3.

[bob jenkins]

I think this FED rule is better than the OBR equivalent.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by Welpe

Agreed.

At least in this case the result would be the same since it was strike 3.

Which makes me wonder the validity of this case play in relation to rule 7-3-5C.

In the play, the batter is out when he swung and missed the pitch. Since the pitch was uncaught, he now becomes a batter-runner. So this is really a case where a BR, not a batter, interferes with the catcher ability to field the pitch. It should be listed as a case play under 8-4-1.

FWIW, I also agree with you that the FED rule on interference on the follow-thru is a bit harsh. I've seen catchers get pretty danged close to home plate, and it's a wonder how they don't obstruct the batter on every swing. Why hold the batter responsible to the point of it being an out, particularly when there wasn't a play in process that the batter hindered?