Interference at Plate

[Duke]

During the Mich/UCLA game, a UCLA batter was called out for interference when she stepped in front of the catcher as the catcher was throwing down to 2B on the steal. Good call.

Question is a what if. If that was the third strike on the batter and the same thing happened with the interference on the throw down, do you now have the lead runner called out? In this case the runner attempting to steal 2B. The batter would now be retired and interfered with the throw.

[outathm]

Yes

[debeau]

Dead ball intereference . All runners return to where they were at the time of the pitch .
The batter is out on the interference not the third strike so it makes no difference to either scenario .
Note : If in the judgement of the umpire you felt this was an attempt to stop a double play then there would be another out .
Short answer No .

[bluezebra]

Originally posted by debeau
Dead ball intereference . All runners return to where they were at the time of the pitch .
The batter is out on the interference not the third strike so it makes no difference to either scenario .
Note : If in the judgement of the umpire you felt this was an attempt to stop a double play then there would be another out .
Short answer No .

Excuse me, on the "what if", the third strike occured BEFORE the interference. Batter's out on strikes, runner's out on interference.

Bob

[U of M Sam]

Originally posted by bluezebra

Excuse me, on the "what if", the third strike occured BEFORE the interference. Batter's out on strikes, runner's out on interference.

Bob

Agreed-batter is out on 3rd strike (happened b-4 interference). Runner going to 2nd out on the retired batter interference. My understanding on the 3rd strike (then batter interference situation) batter is out and the runner closest to home is called out and any other runners return to base occupied at time of pitch.

[debeau]

My apologies I shouldnt answer these at ungodly hours .
Answer is as Blue zebra and U of M Sam stated .

[WestMichBlue]

You are forgetting one key word. Interference on a retured runner must be intentional.

From the original incident, and from the TV replay, I am not sure that I would have judged "intentional."

However, interference on a batter out of the box does not have to be intentional so the umpire had not problem making that call.

WMB

[Steve M]

WMB said
"You are forgetting one key word. Interference on a retured runner must be intentional.

From the original incident, and from the TV replay, I am not sure that I would have judged "intentional."

However, interference on a batter out of the box does not have to be intentional so the umpire had not problem making that call.

WMB"

True, but remember, this is college ball and they are expected to know the game and situations and conditions. Intent is almost always assumed.