D3k
 

RH batter, D3K, batter likely not going to try for 1B, but reflexively steps backward (out of the BB) as F2 tries to put the tag on her. R1 on 2B breaking for 3B.

Does this equate to a typical runner on their way to 1B who steps back (dead ball, runners return)?

That rule only applies when a play attempt is being made on the batter runner and they step back to delay or prevent a tag.

as F2 tries to put the tag on her ?????

B-R didn't step toward the plate so:

what direction is "stepping back" - toward home plate or toward the batter's back (to the side of the baseline in this play)?

Yes, the USA and NFHS rules say toward home plate; but I think the intent and any interpretation we would get would call this INT.

Also, what about the interfering with an U3K rule?

I could see an out of basepath out, but not INT.

A batter could step back (1 step) away from F2, and not be considered out of the basepath, but that 1 step back from a B/R further up the line would be enough for an INT call.

Guess my question should really be, in the OP is she considered a B/R?

For clarity, we are talking about the 3B-side batter's box.

U3K is like any other eligible to run result, the batter becomes a BR (unless 1st occupied with < 2 outs)

I'd have to see it, but if it was obvious the the BR's action was to avoid the tag, I believe the rule applies. Dead ball, BR out

More of a reflex reaction to the tag attempt (and not turning away to return to the 3B dugout). My concern was more about returning the runner to 2B.

A batter becomes a batter-runner on a DU3K.

A batter-runner is out when she steps toward home plate to avoid a tag when running to 1B.

Ergo, a BR is out for INT when the BR increases his or her distance from 1B in an attempt to avoid or delay a tag. Intent not required.

The BR is out, dead ball + runners return to TOI, by an INT ruling in your scenario......IF I am playing Rulebook Lawyer....which is one of my favorite games.

That said, I think common sense says to pass on this one, and keep the ball live....but I don't think it would survive a protest.

If you make this call, sell the shit out of it.

This is wrong. If it were right then the batter runner couldn't try to go AROUND a tag. The rule is about getting CLOSER to home plate. I started to rewrite what you said that way but it doesn't work either. Because one decreases one's distance from home plate by moving parallel to the third base line toward the first base line. I think the mathematical answer is that retreating toward home occurs when the perpendicular distance of the runner to the third base line decreases.

The problem is you are implying intent with your own wording of the statement.

" in an attempt to avoid or delay a tag." That statement alone implies there is an intent involved, so you can't say intent is not required and say "in an attempt to avoid or delay a tag."



For me to call this it has to be obvious that she is attempting to avoid or delay being tagged rather than simply being a batter that was off balance and not attempting to step back from a swing or attempting to get out of the way of the catcher who was attempting to make a play on the runner advancing from 2nd to 3rd.

the crux of my question is, regarding the INT rule that states a runner can't step back away from 1B, does the rule include 1B extended beyond home plate.

If yes, then in the OP, it's a dead ball R1 returns to 2B.