Batter Interfering on phony fake bunt
 

I had a play on Friday here at the USSSA in St Louis.

With a runner on First, the batter pretneds to be faking a bunt and brings the bat back in a manner to interfere with the catcher trying to catch the pitch and throw out the runner.

I have seen it many times before but, in this case, the batter actually hit the catcher's glove. Since, in my judegement, the batter was making no effort to hit the pitch and only trying to hinder the catcher, I called her out for interference and sent the runner back to first.

My partner was the UIC who said I nailed it.

My question is this: what sort of line do you draw in your mind on when this is interference?

Joe in Missouri

The fake bunt part probably does not matter, what matters is the bat hindering the catcher's play. The only question is which rule sets require intent. If intent required, the "line in my mind" would be just my reaction to the batter's move, where she is looking, etc.

Right, the fake bunt part is just where it seems to happen most often. A lot of the time where I think I might have interference on the batter, the runner is not moving so, the batter is not interfering with anything-correct?

This was a USSSA World Series. This week, the same park is hosting a NAFA World Series. I am going to the umpire meeting this afternoon and I will bring this up to the Regional UIC.

Joe in Missouri

How do you pretend to fake a bunt? ;)

Unless the batter was standing at the back of the box, what is the catcher doing stepping up out of the catcher's box to catch a pitch?

I have no problem with your call if you judged the batter's purpose was to interfere with the catcher. Personally, I would have to be damn sure that was the case if I'm behind the plate.

It isn't unusual, at least in my mind, for a batter to pull back a bat and then slap at the ball. Just because a batter was showing bunt and then draws the bat back doesn't mean s/he cannot still attempt to hit the ball. And it certainly doesn't give the catcher a right of way to step up.

I was thinking the same thing...

Isn't a phony fake bunt a real bunt? :D

Definiately in NCAA, AFA, and NAFA. :D

Gotta admit, when I saw the title of the thread, that's what I thought.

Just thinking, which we all know gets me in trouble, if you do not call the batter out for interference, then do you not have to call obstruction on the catcher? and award first to the batter.

With the batter hitting the catcher you are going to need to make a call. Right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dakota
I was thinking the same thing...

Isn't a phony fake bunt
Let's see, first a bunt stance, then acting like it was a fake, then doing anything else not a fake bunt. :eek: ;) :) Some imagination ! :D


Good meeting you the other day, even if we didn't work together. :cool:

I've seen this exact play...

This first time it happened, I wasn't sure what I just saw, then another batter in the lineup did the same move.

Squaring to bunt, then pulling the bat way back, directly toward F2, butt first (as opposed to swinging it back). Not towards the mitt, but definitely towards the mask. No contact was made, but definitely not a move needed to check one's bunt.

Kind of slow, too (relatively speaking), not a quick snap back to the batter's shoulder.

Didn't call Interference, but I told the coach it will stop now. And it did.

I have nothing on the alleged fake bunt part.. agree with Irish as to the catchers actions being a deciding factor here with regards to the contact.

Now that description sounds like something that could be seen as INT.

That is what I had...Not something the player came up with herself...she was trained to do it.