Throw from F2 hits batter's bat on backswing - Call?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

Here they are in one block, together. I don't see the conflict, either.

He must not be talking about us.

[bigwally]

Lol...Actually I am referring to you in one instance. It seems like you werent clear on it either since you answered this post,


'ok..I will try one more. On a dropped third strike the catcher is about to pick up the loose ball and the batter's follow through knocks the ball away from her as she is about to pick up the ball'

this way,

'Don't know how many times it can be repeated. The batter is permitted to swing at the ball and in most cases there is a follow-through associated with that swing. Unless you observe the batter do something out of the norm with that follow through, there is no violation'.

Now you post this,

'Now you seem to want to apply this to interference with a U3K or hitting a live ball a second time.

Not the same thing though in 2006 I did propose a rule change to make interfering with a U3K to an intentional act for the BR to be ruled out. I sure picked the wrong year to do that'.


This is one of the contradictions we are talking about...Which is it? If the batter knocks the uncaught 3rd strike ball away from the catcher with a normal follow through, is it interference or not?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by bigwally

'ok..I will try one more. On a dropped third strike the catcher is about to pick up the loose ball and the batter's follow through knocks the ball away from her as she is about to pick up the ball'

this way,

'Don't know how many times it can be repeated. The batter is permitted to swing at the ball and in most cases there is a follow-through associated with that swing. Unless you observe the batter do something out of the norm with that follow through, there is no violation'.

Now you post this,

'Now you seem to want to apply this to interference with a U3K or hitting a live ball a second time.

Not the same thing though in 2006 I did propose a rule change to make interfering with a U3K to an intentional act for the BR to be ruled out. I sure picked the wrong year to do that'.


This is one of the contradictions we are talking about...Which is it? If the batter knocks the uncaught 3rd strike ball away from the catcher with a normal follow through, is it interference or not?

You are correct, I missed the U3K (another rule that needs to go away) in your post. Mind probably too locked into the OP

[bigwally]

I wish i had a nickle for every time my mind has locked up..lol.....There are very few that have the command and understanding of the rules that you do so I can understand that happening. I guess the point I'm trying to make out of this entire conversation is that, the wording or intent of the batter interference rule is, at best, subjective to the layman. I always appreciate your input IrishMafia as well as AtlUmpSteve. I often refer to both of your posts when dicussing rules with my cohorts and consider them to pretty much gospel. Thank you both for your patience with me and for your wisdom