Steal of home (Video)
 

I saw the Texas Tech vs Texas game yesterday where the Tech batter scored on a straight steal of home.

Sit. R3 , 2 outs, 2 strikes on batter. Pitcher in windup, R3 off with first motion. As he nears plate B stays put (no swing), and catcher comes in front of plate to catch pitch. R3 slides in clearly safe. Question: 1. What if pitch were a strike (pitch in question appeared to be outside. 2. What if batter swings.?

Catcher's interference and a balk. Score the run, put the batter on 1st. Doesn't matter what the pitch would have been and it doesn't matter if the batter swings (unless he puts the ball in play).

So in this situation if you are HP and the catcher stays put you call ball/strike? But if he comes forward that's when you have CI?

Absolutely.

If the catcher comes forward, how can you call the pitch? It never reached the plate, and the ball has to do that to be ruled either a Ball or Strike.

And I hope the batter doesn't swing in this case, cuz he's liable to clock the catcher in the back!

What was the call in that game? Last year the possibility of calling CI existed in two college games and was no called. I think one was a steal of home and the other was the Vandy triple steal.

Here's the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiCg...ature=youtu.be

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/hiCgJpcHXdM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Umpire called runner safe and the pitch a ball.

Should have been a balk and award batter 1B for catcher's obstruction.

For sure that will be one of the videos presented at next year's NCAA pre-season clinics.

I doubt it. Last years sits were left alone. I think when the runner is safe the NCAA guys leave it alone. Last years calls were argued on another site and since the batter wasn't swinging some big dogs argued against calling CI.

Must be an "old school" thing. Years ago, when I first learned to umpire, I was taught by a Kinnaman School graduate, who said that without contact, you have nothing, so batters were taught to swing (gently, he hoped) and make contact with the catcher.

They're wrong. NCAA interpretation says this is a balk and CI.

NCAA umpires are not calling it.

Here's the rule. I bolded parts that you can use to call or not call the CI:

"e. If any defensive player interferes with the batter’s swing or prevents the
individual from striking at a pitched ball;
A.R.—Catcher’s interference on a batter should be called only on the batter’s actual swing to hit the pitch. If a batter, during preliminary loosening-up swings, hits the catcher or the catcher’s mitt during the backswing, the umpire immediately should call time, and not interference. The pitch or swing should not be allowed since the batter’s concentration or rhythm could be affected.
(1) If a play follows the interference, the offensive team may elect to ignore
the interference and accept the play. However, if the batter reaches first
base and all other runners advance at least one base, the interference is
ignored.
(2) Any runner attempting to steal on a catcher’s interference with the
batter’s swing shall be awarded the base the runner is attempting to reach
If a runner is not attempting to steal on the catcher’s interference, the
individual is not entitled to the next base, if not forced to advance because
of the batter being awarded first base.
Exception—If there is catcher’s interference on a squeeze play, the batter
is awarded first base, the run scores and all other runners advance one base on the balk created by the interference.

Here's the interpretation that says definitively what to call here, from the NCAA:

"Catcher stepping on or in front of home plate to receive a pitch in his attempt to put out a runner stealing home before the batter has an opportunity to swing.
a. Treat as catcher’s interference. A balk is charged to the pitcher, the ball is dead, the run is scored and the batter is awarded first base on the interference."

This NCAA umpire does if he sees it.