I don't mean to over analyze but....

[rwest]

I am very careful when reading the rule book and I analyze the wording. I also look for certain things like intent. This brings me to my point. Rule 7-6-P-1, does not make any mention of the word intent. It says....

The batter shall not: Hinder the catcher from catching or throwing the ball by stepping out of the batter's box.

Am I to assume that intent is not relevant here? Is the mere stepping out of the box when the catcher is attempting to throw out an advancing runner an out if in the opinion of the umpire this hindered the throw? Does the catcher have to throw the ball or could she, realizing she is going to hit the batter, stop her throw? Would this still be considered interference? Also, there are legitimate times the batter can step out of the box (i.e wild pitch, passed ball, called strike on what the batter thought was ball 4). Are these times exceptions to the rule? For example, suppose the following....

B1 at bat. 3 balls 0 strike count. R1 at 2nd. The pitch is called a strike by the umpire. The batter steps out of the box thinking the pitch was a ball. (This is a legitimate time the batter can step out of the box.) R1 trys to steal 3rd. The catcher attempts to throw to 3rd but the batter was in her way. She either a) did not throw because she was afraid she would hit the batter or b) had to alter her throw by throwing around the runner.

What is your call in these situations?

Also rule 7-6-P-4 does not mention intent. It says....

The batter shall not: Interfere with a play at home plate.

Suppose the batter does not realize a squeeze play is on. R1 at 3rd breaks for home at the release of the pitch. If the batter just stands in the box, blocking the catcher from making a tag is the batter out, even though there was no intent, just a dumb play?

Thanks!
Randall

[bluezebra]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by rwest
[B]I am very careful when reading the rule book and I analyze the wording. I also look for certain things like intent. This brings me to my point. Rule 7-6-P-1, does not make any mention of the word intent. It says....

The batter shall not: Hinder the catcher from catching or throwing the ball by stepping out of the batter's box.

Am I to assume that intent is not relevant here? Is the mere stepping out of the box when the catcher is attempting to throw out an advancing runner an out if in the opinion of the umpire this hindered the throw? Does the catcher have to throw the ball or could she, realizing she is going to hit the batter, stop her throw? Would this still be considered interference? Also, there are legitimate times the batter can step out of the box (i.e wild pitch, passed ball, called strike on what the batter thought was ball 4). Are these times exceptions to the rule? For example, suppose the following....

B1 at bat. 3 balls 0 strike count. R1 at 2nd. The pitch is called a strike by the umpire. The batter steps out of the box thinking the pitch was a ball. (This is a legitimate time the batter can step out of the box.) R1 trys to steal 3rd. The catcher attempts to throw to 3rd but the batter was in her way. She either a) did not throw because she was afraid she would hit the batter or b) had to alter her throw by throwing around the runner.

**Did the umpire whisper the strike call? It's difficult to believe that a batter could not hear a strike call. (a) and (b)..Interference. This are different situations than running out of the lane on the way to 1B. There a throw MUST be made, because the interference is with the ability to receive the throw, not the with the attempt to throw.

What is your call in these situations?

Also rule 7-6-P-4 does not mention intent. It says....

The batter shall not: Interfere with a play at home plate.

Suppose the batter does not realize a squeeze play is on. R1 at 3rd breaks for home at the release of the pitch. If the batter just stands in the box, blocking the catcher from making a tag is the batter out, even though there was no intent, just a dumb play?

**If there's a squeeze play is on, the batter should be attempting to bunt. If she missed the signal, too bad. The batter must vacate the box on a play at home, if not attempting to hit the pitch.

Thanks!
Randall

**You're welcome!

Bob

[SC Ump]

Am I to assume that intent is not relevant here? That is correct if they have stepped out of the box.

Is the mere stepping out of the box when the catcher is attempting to throw out an advancing runner an out if in the opinion of the umpire this hindered the throw? If it interferred with the throw, then the batter is out.

Does the catcher have to throw the ball or could she, realizing she is going to hit the batter, stop her throw?Ummm... in my opinion, if the catcher didn't attempt the throw, the batter could not have interferred with the throw. I would have a tough time ruling that interference.

Regarding the situation of 3-0 on the batter... I think I would have to see it, but it is probably an interference call by me. First, why does the batter think it was a ball when I'm yelling "ARRRRRRR"? Second, if the batter had received a walk and the catcher was throwing to third, it seems to me that the batter would have almost had to take a step back to be in the way of the throw and they have no business doing that. Third, the batter needs to get there head in the game. Fourth, the rule book states they are out.

The batter shall not: Interfere with a play at home plate. The play as you discribed it is more a concern in baseball, when a player is stealing home. In softball, if the runner at 3rd does not leave the base until the ball leaves the pitcher's hand, about the only time the runner will come home is on a past ball or, on very rare occasion, on a missed sac-bunt. Either way, the batter has to be aware of what is going on and has to get out of the way. The difference between this and the first play were the catcher is throwing, is that the catcher must throw immediately and the batter cannot be expected to 'disappear' from the batter's box. But in this play at home, the runner has to run sixty feet and the batter has time to get out of the way.

[debeau]

ISF
I agree with SC Ump in all situations except I would be harder on the batter stopping the catcher
If the batter prevents a throw or even an attempt then I would rule interference .
If the catcher stands to throw but doesnt because of the batter then interference .
I would add that you would have to be there to see the situation after all it is judgement