Umpire interference

[collinb]

National Federation rules.
With two strikes on the batter and first base unoccupied.
The pitcher throws a change up that has the batter swinging way too soon. The pitch is so slow and high that the backswing of the batter, and the catchers glove and ball come together and once. It sounds as if the bat first makes contact with the catcher glove and then the ball hits the catchers glove and bounces off into the first base dug out.
Is this catchers obstruction, dropped third strike or batters interference? Confused,and not knowing wheather it was interference or obtruction I called it foul ball. No one was happy.

[Steve M]

Collin,
First, don't make up calls. By saying that was a foul ball, you did some damage to your integrity. I suspect that was one of the things that "nobody was happy" with. Now, after a quick scan of rule book & case book, I do not see this exact situation covered. Maybe Roger will see this one and respond. Anyway, you do not have obstruction by the catcher - I'm assuming that the catcher was legally positioned here. You don't have obstruction because at the time on contact (glove & bat), the batter is not permitted to contact the ball - already swung & missed. Do you have interference on the batter? I think so. There is no requirement that the interference be intentional - look at your rule book definition and it sez "offensive interference is an act (physical or verbal) by a member of the team at bat who interferes with, obstructs, impedes, hinders or confuses any fielder attempting to make a play...." Note that this does not say anything about intent. For your future work, I'd suggest that you break a play like this down sequentially and then deal with it sequentially. Do that here and you have:
1)Strike Three - batter may run if uncaught
2)Interference - batter's contact hindered/confused/ ... the catcher while trying to catch the ball
3)Plate ump - who's top priority is watching the pitch all the way into the catcher's glove - sez "Dead Ball, Strike Three, Batter is out." While pointing at the location of the contact of the bat and the catcher.
If offensive coach questions politely, answer with "Coach, the batter swung & missed, so that was strike three. The batter then inadvertently made contact with the catcher while the catcher was in the act of catching - that's interference and that's why I called dead ball."

[Gulf Coast Blue]

I am going with Batter interference in this instance.

The overswing by the batter interfered with the catcher's ability to make an out. NFHS 2-5-2

Dead ball.......batter out.

Joel

[Roger Greene]

Steve and Joel are correct, IMO.

The only place I know that you may find discussion of the batter interference on the backswing in a rule book would be OBR 6.06(c)comment. "If a batter strikes at a ball and misses and swings so hard he carries the bat all the way around and, in the umpire's judgement, unintentionally hits the catcher or the ball in back of him on the backswing before the catcher has securely held the ball it shall be called a strike only (not interference). The ball will be dead, however, and no runner shall advance on the play."

Therefore, since in the sitch presented, there was a two strike count the batter is out. Had the count been less than two strikes it would have simply been a strike and a dead ball. I would not declare the batter out for inteference, unless the action was clearly an intentional attempt to protect a stealing runner.(That would be a third world play!)

Since this is not specifically spelled out in the Fed book, I think you must look at other association interpertations and even baseball interpertations in some cases, as softball is decended from the baseball game. In this case the comment quoted just makes sense for the occurance diescribed.

Roger Greene,
Member UT

[Steve M]

Thanks, Roger. I knew there was a "weak" interference in one of the books. I just couldn't recall where it was or what the exact wording was. I agree completely that when a situation comes up that is not covered by an organizations rules, the right approach is to use interpretations of other organizations that you know. But, use caution with this aproach and discuss it with your partner if possible. 'Cuz ya don't want to violate this organization's rules by using another's interp.

[GOS0170]

Steve is correct and Fed Rule 7-3-5 could be used by stating that the pitch had not been caught at that point and the batter was a batter runner until the pitch is caught. It may be streching it a bit but it works.