Catcher Obstruction/Batter Interference

[jmkupka]

Nope, it was entirely the catcher's fault.

As long as the batter's in the BB, catcher must do everything necessary to avoid interfering with the swing.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

Nope, it was entirely the catcher's fault.

As long as the batter's in the BB, catcher must do everything necessary to avoid interfering with the swing.

Yes ............

as long as you judge the "swing" was an attempt to hit the ball. A "swing" that you judge to be an attempt to contact or interfere with the catcher is batter interference.

Rarely true, and you better be SURE, but I hate "absolutes" in rulings.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

Yes ............

as long as you judge the "swing" was an attempt to hit the ball. A "swing" that you judge to be an attempt to contact or interfere with the catcher is batter interference.

Rarely true, and you better be SURE, but I hate "absolutes" in rulings.

Intent is not required (at least not for NFHS; don't have the USA née ASA books available now). I'm not saying I would judge differently, just being a bit pedantic.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Intent is not required (at least not for NFHS; don't have the USA née ASA books available now). I'm not saying I would judge differently, just being a bit pedantic.

What exactly are you trying to say here?

To judge a swing to be interference on the batter ... you DARN WELL better be judging intent on the batter's part to hit the catcher and not the ball.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

What exactly are you trying to say here?

To judge a swing to be interference on the batter ... you DARN WELL better be judging intent on the batter's part to hit the catcher and not the ball.

If this was a higher level game, catcher is not crowding the batter, and the batter takes a "giant step back" and reaches wayyyy back into the catcher with her bat...???

What I am saying is interference requires an act of interference, not an intentional act of interference.

If this was 16U A game, I can certainly see interference as a legitimate call.

It's only "clearly" an attempt to swing because of the age and low level of play, IMO.