When I'm Wrong, I'm wrong: Interference is better without intent

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Andy

Tony - Are you saying that you would not have called interference on the batter under the 2006 rule? As I picture this play, the batter intentionally moved in the batter's box and interferred with the catcher's throw. She may not have meant to interfere with the catcher, but her intentional movement did cause interference. I've got an interference call under 2006 and 2007 rules.

I agree. Recovering one's balance is one thing. Preparing for the next pitch is another.

I think this is where the "I have to read their mind to make this call" mentality came into play in years past. There is a difference in the batter's action/reaction being the result of a pitch/swing and taking a step to reposition one's self in the box.