The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 20, 2019, 02:58pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 51
Batter Interference

I was recently told by some more senior officials that in order to have batter interference under NFHS Rule 7-4-4 with the catcher making a play on a runner you had to have either physical contact by the batter against the catcher or an actual throw by the catcher. This was not my original thinking. Thoughts?
Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 20, 2019, 03:23pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Northeast Nebraska
Posts: 776
Contact or an actual throw is not required. The case book has a few good examples.

The line in the case book that is most generically relevant is [the batter] "is entitled to her position in the batter's box unless she moves or re-establishes her position after F2 has received the pitch, which then prevents F2 from attempting to play on a runner. Failing to move so that the catcher can make a throw is not batter interference." (emphasis mine)

In other words: An act which prevents F2 from executing or attempting a play on a base runner is batter INT. The act does not have to be intentional. Of course, if there is no attempt by F2 to actually make a play, then there is no INT.
__________________
Powder blue since 1998. Longtime forum lurker.
Umpiring Goals: Call the knee strike accurately (getting the low pitch since 2017)/NCAA D1 postseason/ISF-WBSC Certification/Nat'l Indicator Fraternity(completed)
"I'm gonna call it ASA for the foreseeable future. You all know what I mean."
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 23, 2019, 03:26pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 51
Thanks. This confirms my original understanding that actual physical contact by the batter or an actual throw by the catcher is not always required.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Sat May 25, 2019, 10:57am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by RefBob View Post
Thanks. This confirms my original understanding that actual physical contact by the batter or an actual throw by the catcher is not always required.
There was a video from a high school game a few years ago about this. IIRC the situation was as follows.

R1 on 2nd, B2 at the plate. R1 is attempting to steal on the play. Pitch comes in F2 catches then attempts a throw to F5 at third. B2 is still standing in the batters box and gets drilled with the pitch in the side of the helmet, which immediately dropped her. PU immediately kills the play due to concern about the batter getting hit with the throw.

Umpires get together and rule R1 safe at third base. Since the batter had not moved from her position in the batter's box it couldn't be interference. IIRC the batter ended up with a concussion from the throw and had to leave the game as well.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 27, 2019, 11:40am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 31
Had BI yesterday on first pitch. Popped straight up, batter just stands there and catcher cannot reach around/through her to make catch. Crowd screams “she’s protected in the batters box”. (actually had contact, but not needed)
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 27, 2019, 01:55pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigdogtx View Post
Had BI yesterday on first pitch. Popped straight up, batter just stands there and catcher cannot reach around/through her to make catch. Crowd screams “she’s protected in the batters box”. (actually had contact, but not needed)
Batter-Runner, not the batter anymore. Still out. Different rule.
__________________
Rich Ives
Different does not equate to wrong
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 27, 2019, 01:59pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Ives View Post
Batter-Runner, not the batter anymore. Still out. Different rule.
Yeah, coach even wondered why she just stood there and watched it. Early in the year I guess. Probably went 30’ up according to BU.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 28, 2019, 08:45am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 648
USA tourney Delaware this weekend, 16U semis...

R1 on 2B, hit and run, B2 squares and has to reach for the outside pitch. Her follow-through carries her out of the BB into the front of the plate.

F2, who goes wide right to make the throw, now has the batter directly between her and 3B. Her throw is semi-aborted lands on the ground beyond the batter.

No contact anywhere, but I had no problem calling INT on B2.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jun 03, 2019, 01:40pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 74
seems like more and more unless there is contact, calls are not getting made. Had a tourney this weekend and one brutal missed call.

Wild Pitch/Passed ball, batter comes out of the box probably 6-8 feet forward towards the pitcher and is standing there, my pitcher running in stops and goes around her my catcher just flipped ball but P in the avoidance of the player in no mans land - late getting there and runner safe.

Asked ump, he asked for help said they "saw nothing", but then again these two missed a ball that landed right on the chalk over 3B. Was not their best day.

But I can say that I have seen probably 20-30 instances in last several seasons where I would say Intereference on batter would of been appropriate call, but no contact, no call.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 05, 2019, 07:56am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmkupka View Post
USA tourney Delaware this weekend, 16U semis...

R1 on 2B, hit and run, B2 squares and has to reach for the outside pitch. Her follow-through carries her out of the BB into the front of the plate.

F2, who goes wide right to make the throw, now has the batter directly between her and 3B. Her throw is semi-aborted lands on the ground beyond the batter.

No contact anywhere, but I had no problem calling INT on B2.
Curious as to why the catcher wasn't just throwing right down the baseline instead of trying to go around the batter
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 05, 2019, 09:51am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 648
the pitch was wide, pulling the batter and the catcher to the right. Both of their momentums (momenta?) kept them in the same alignment to 3B.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Umpire Interference / Batter Interference bob jenkins Baseball 17 Mon Feb 06, 2012 09:57pm
Batter Interference Kleff Baseball 49 Tue Oct 13, 2009 09:24am
Batter Interference?? DaveASA/FED Softball 7 Thu Jun 02, 2005 05:07pm
Batter Interference? Dougster45 Baseball 17 Tue Jun 15, 2004 09:20am
Batter Interference PAblue87 Baseball 10 Thu May 23, 2002 10:06pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:14pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1