catching the inside pitch

Little Jimmy · #1 (**permalink**) Tue May 24, 2005, 01:21pm

In a similar vein to one of the last posts, but a little different. After doing a big chunk of a lower level rec season I've got to know some of the habits of the individual players. There's one girl who when faced with an inside pitch that's on it's way to hitting her will instinctively reach her hand out as protection. The other night she almost caught the ball (this is 11-12 fast pitch but the ball still can be quite slow). I've been calling hit by a pitch and awarding first. Defensive coach wants interference the other night but I can't go with it.

Once again the ball was going to hit her even without the hand. AltUmpSteve mentioned ASA casebook 7.6-15 as a reason to rule interference. Do you think this applies in my scenario?

JEL · #2 (**permalink**) Tue May 24, 2005, 01:35pm

I think 7.6-15 wouldn't apply because you stated this girl threw out her hand as protection. You had judged that she would have been hit anyway, and inferred you felt the reaching of the hand was an attempt to avoid being hit. I say HBP, and yes coach, she did make an attempt to avoid.

However, if it did hit her in the hand, and the hands are part of the bat.........

JUST KIDDING!!

SRW · #3 (**permalink**) Tue May 24, 2005, 01:47pm

Quote:

Originally posted by JEL
However, if it did hit her in the hand, and the hands are part of the bat.........

*thwap*

DaveASA/FED · #4 (**permalink**) Tue May 24, 2005, 03:04pm

I agree with JEL (except about the hands and the bat thing) the rule says she has to make an attempt to avoid being hit, not make a good attempt

some girls freeze up and the girl you are talking about has a reflex to protect herself with an outstretched hand. HBP, and how is there INT HBP is a dead ball, so no action can happen for batter to interfere with!!

Steve M · #5 (**permalink**) Tue May 24, 2005, 03:26pm

I am quite sure that you've been calling this wrong. Blocking the ball with her hand is not an attempt to get out of the way. And I have seen batters try to "block" the ball with the bat - we call that a strike. Even though it is defensive, it is still an attempt to hit the ball. There really is no difference between that and with your batter who interferes with the ball by hitting it with her hand. She is interfering.

DownTownTonyBrown · #6 (**permalink**) Tue May 24, 2005, 03:30pm

Of course you are all assuming that the pitch is coming at the batter's body and that it would hit her body if it wasn't swatted away with her hand...

I've seen batters step back for an inside pitch and then stick their hand out... the pitch would not have hit them except for the fact that they stuck their hand in front of it... TIME, Dead Ball, don't do that batter. If there was an out to be made by the catcher, perhaps an interference call and an out would need to be made.

Little Jimmy · #7 (**permalink**) Tue May 24, 2005, 05:38pm

Steve M,

Not being argumentative (or maybe I am ) but the girl I'm describing is definitely getting out of the way as best she can. She's turning head and body, but throwing the hand up as a reflex. Carrying it out to the extreme, let's say we have a great pitcher/batter going against each other. Pitcher shoots a fast ball for the inside corner but it gets away from her and is heading for batters hip. Batter reacts by twisting but because of the speed of the pitch she can't avoid. Hand drops down as an instinctive reaction. Interference just because of the hand?

UmpireErnie · #8 (**permalink**) Tue May 24, 2005, 06:21pm

I can see both senarios here.. and it's going to come down to our judgement each time a sich like this happens.

If a batter throws an arm up to sheild herself from or deflect a ball that is going to most likely hit her anyway I believe it is still a HBP. She was making an attempt to avoid being hit, or at least be hit on the arm rather than the body. Off you go to 1B.

However, the sitch Tony Brown described above is a different call entirely, where the batter reaches out and makes contact with a ball that she had otherwise not been touched by. Dead ball, ball or strike as may be, possible interference if she takes away an oppertounity for F2 to make an out on a runner.

Judgement on part of the blue. The fun part of the job.

[Edited by UmpireErnie on May 24th, 2005 at 09:44 PM]

Steve M · #9 (**permalink**) Tue May 24, 2005, 06:21pm

Little Jimmy said
"Not being argumentative (or maybe I am ) but the girl I'm describing is definitely getting out of the way as best she can. She's turning head and body, but throwing the hand up as a reflex."
This description is a far different one than the first post to this thread. Based on this second description, I do not have interference.

And, in your extreme, "Batter reacts by twisting but because of the speed of the pitch she can't avoid. Hand drops down as an instinctive reaction. Interference just because of the hand?" I do not have interference there, either.

If the batter makes no effort to avoid the pitch and just blocks or catches the ball, I may have interference. If, in my judgement, the pitch would not have hit the batter and the batter blocks or catches the ball (because the batter thought it would hit her) - I most likely have interference and will call it.

Maybe it's different in 11-12 yr old ball. I don't know - I don't work those games. With these knees, I can't get low enough in my plate stance to do them justice. And, frankly, I prefer games where the players know what they are doing.