NFHS batter interference?

[shipwreck]

I had an intense game the other night with #1 ranked playing #2 ranked team. Please tell me if I ruled correct, incorrect or HTBT? Runners on first and second. Runner is stealing third. Pitch comes in and catcher tries throwing runner out. Batter is in the batter's box, swinging bat around doing some sort of warm up swings. Ball being thrown from catcher hits the bat that is above the head of the batter while she is doing these warm up swings. I ruled interference, called batter out, and moved runners back. What do you say?

Dave

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by shipwreck

I had an intense game the other night with #1 ranked playing #2 ranked team. Please tell me if I ruled correct, incorrect or HTBT? Runners on first and second. Runner is stealing third. Pitch comes in and catcher tries throwing runner out. Batter is in the batter's box, swinging bat around doing some sort of warm up swings. Ball being thrown from catcher hits the bat that is above the head of the batter while she is doing these warm up swings. I ruled interference, called batter out, and moved runners back. What do you say?

Dave

I would say the warmup swings aren e not a natural or normal continuation, evif she swung at the pitch.

[BretMan]

Sounds like a reasonable call. Swinging the bat around on practice swings isn't a normal part of receiving pitch or maintaining an expected batting position.

Let me guess...the offense coach blew up and argued against interference because his batter was "in the box".

[Rita C]

Originally Posted by shipwreck

I had an intense game the other night with #1 ranked playing #2 ranked team. Please tell me if I ruled correct, incorrect or HTBT? Runners on first and second. Runner is stealing third. Pitch comes in and catcher tries throwing runner out. Batter is in the batter's box, swinging bat around doing some sort of warm up swings. Ball being thrown from catcher hits the bat that is above the head of the batter while she is doing these warm up swings. I ruled interference, called batter out, and moved runners back. What do you say?

Dave

I'm with the others. I would have had interference.

Rita

[shipwreck]

Originally Posted by BretMan

Sounds like a reasonable call. Swinging the bat around on practice swings isn't a normal part of receiving pitch or maintaining an expected batting position.

Let me guess...the offense coach blew up and argued against interference because his batter was "in the box".

After the explanation the head coach was ok with my ruling. Problem is, the assistant coach was not (although I really don't care about him) He let me know then if that's the case, he would instruct his catchers to just intentionally throw the ball at the batter in order to get interference. I told him that he would not only NOT get interference, he would get unsporting behavior slapped on him.
Dave

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by shipwreck

After the explanation the head coach was ok with my ruling. Problem is, the assistant coach was not (although I really don't care about him) He let me know then if that's the case, he would instruct his catchers to just intentionally throw the ball at the batter in order to get interference. I told him that he would not only NOT get interference, he would get unsporting behavior slapped on him.
Dave

I would suggest ignoring the ***. Coach. If I felt compelled to say anything to him at all, it would be that even suggesting that his players should injure others is enough to get him thrown out.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by shipwreck

I had an intense game the other night with #1 ranked playing #2 ranked team. Please tell me if I ruled correct, incorrect or HTBT? Runners on first and second. Runner is stealing third. Pitch comes in and catcher tries throwing runner out. Batter is in the batter's box, swinging bat around doing some sort of warm up swings. Ball being thrown from catcher hits the bat that is above the head of the batter while she is doing these warm up swings. I ruled interference, called batter out, and moved runners back. What do you say?

Since we're speaking FED, the appropriate rule is 7-4-4:

"[The batter is out when] The batter interferes with the catcher's fielding or throwing by leaning over home plate, by stepping out of the batter's box, by making any movement which hinders action at home after the pitch reaches the catcher or the catcher's attempt to play on a runner, or by failing to make a reasonable effort to vacate congested area when there is a throw to home and there is time for the batter to move away."

FED Caseplay 7.4.4.A gives this explanation in a similar play: "B2 is entitled to her position in the batter's box and is not subject to interference unless she moves or re-establishes her position after F2 has received the pitch, which then prevents F2 from attempting to play on a runner."

Essentially, the batter must stay in the box and not move when F2 attempts a play on a runner at third. Any movement, even to reset in the box after the pitch, that hinders the catcher would be grounds for an interference call.

[Andy]

Originally Posted by shipwreck

...I ruled interference, called batter out, and moved runners back. What do you say?

Dave

I say...."Good Call" ...for all of the reasons previously cited.