Batter Interference

[tschromm3]

Runners on 1st and 3rd. Runner from 1st attempts to steal 2nd. Batter swings and misses, and in doing so, ends up in front of the plate. Catcher attempting throw to 2nd, makes contact with batter in front of the plate, hindering her throw. Interference on batter was called. And after MUCH confusion, they ruled the runner at 3rd to be out, runner now on 2nd returns to 1st. Correct ruling?

 

[mroby5172]

No, pretty sure batter is out, dead ball and all base runners return to originally occupied base. However, if it happened to be strike 3 on the batter and it was already a recorded out then one of the base runners is also out, I think it is the one attempting the steal, but it may be the one closest to home.

 

[BretMan2]

On this play, it is always the batter who is out. Dead ball and runners return to their last bases.

As noted, if this was strike three and the batter was already out, then the runner closest to home would be declared out.

 

[tschromm3]

It was not strike 3, batter stayed at plate, they called runner on 3rd out. They made a good call to recognize the interference, but executed the rule incorrectly. Thanks!

 

[FC2019]

batter and runner are out

 

[Long Baller]

I saw something very similar to this a couple of weeks ago. Runner steals 2nd, and the batter takes a big swing and miss at the ball. Her off balance swing leaves her with one foot out of the box, toward the plate, and the other still in the batter's box. Catcher comes out of her stance, pumps the throw and holds the ball. The catcher never makes contact with the batter. The initial call was that the runner was safe, but after a conference the umpires called interference and the runner out.

My question is; Does contact need to be made with the batter, and/or does the throw need to actually be attempted to 2nd base for the interference call? I can see the argument both ways on the interference call.

 

[BretMan2]

Contact is not necessary. But it must be evident that the catcher was attempting a play and that the play was impeded by the batter.

Of course, actually making a throw is proof of a play being made. If the catcher cocks her arm like she’s going to throw, but doesn’t release the ball, the umpire needs to see something there to convince him a throw was being attempted and was interfered with. So there will be an element of umpire judgment in that one. Just holding the ball up and bringing the arm back, with no forward movement at all, might not be enough to judge an attempted throw was being made.

 

[Long Baller]

Great explanation as always. Thanks BretMan!