Strike or Interference?

[Dholloway1962]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

the book states that if the batter's swing is delayed and it is obviously meant to interfere with the catcher's attempt to make a play on a runner, interference should be called.

That is a rule I didn't know was there and need to find it to use! See that happen every once and a while. Can you give me the rule number please.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dholloway1962

That is a rule I didn't know was there and need to find it to use! See that happen every once and a while. Can you give me the rule number please.

RS #36, Catcher's Obstruction.Note, Page 118

[bkbjones]

Exactly. Under the ASA rule set, if the batter meant to interfere then you have interference -- according to what I read in RS 36.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

RS #36, Catcher's Obstruction.Note, Page 118

On a side note, this is an interpretation of batter's interference, but it is placed in the catcher's obstruction RS. ASA really does need an editor for their book.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dakota

On a side note, this is an interpretation of batter's interference, but it is placed in the catcher's obstruction RS. ASA really does need an editor for their book.

Rubbish! You want batters interference, turn to page 113-114.

The previous citation simply helps the umpire realize a line between CO and BI. And it is so simple, there shouldn't even be a question about it unless you are not smarter than a fifth grader......er, wait a minute. There are a load of them.

[tmielke]

I just read the OP to my daughter who I referenced in my previous post. I prefaced by asking her what the call should be. She started laughing and said interference, batters out!

It really is pretty simple!

[wadeintothem]

The OP stated there was no interference.

Simply delaying a swing on a steal is NOT BI.

That doesnt mean I'm giving the batter a freebie though, I'm calling a strike if there was no BI.