Riddle me this

default

default

Member
2 outs, runner on third. batter in the box is right handed. batter takes a ball and the catcher attempts to throw down to third. the ball hits the batters bat as she is standing with one foot in the box looking down at the third base coach. the ball deflects out of play. You make the call - interference on the batter even though she has her back to the play or dead ball?
 
default

default

Member
ASA, NSA, USSSA???

I'll say Thrown ball out of play, runner gets home.
 
default

default

Member
sanction doesnt matter....as long as the batter is in the box the catcher has to work around her
 
default

default

Member
But the batter only has one foot in the box and is looking to the third base coach. I would say interference. If both feet in the box then ball out of play batter is in safe haven with both feet but not just one.
 
default

default

Member
sanction doesnt matter....as long as the batter is in the box the catcher has to work around her

by the Batter being in the box gaurantees no protection.

Umpires judgement call, did she intentionally get in the way of the catcher or intentionally not move out of the way of the catcher attempting to make a play... if no then it is the same as a throw hitting a runner while on base..... live ball until it rolls out of play....if the answer was yes in the umpires judgement...dead ball batter is out for interference...

Otherwise it would be the best way to get an out..Have catcher throw ball into batter like she was trying to throw out the runner at third...
 
default

default

Member
And by the way an "umpires judgement call" is non protestable and if you argue such a call the parking lot is where you'll be watching the rest of the game
 
default

default

Member
On this play, one foot out of the batter's box equals being out of the box. Whether intentional or not, or whether the batter was looking the other way or oblivious to what was going on behind her doesn't matter.

This is batter interference. Dead ball, batter out, any runners return to their bases.

When the catcher is making a play to first, second or third base the batter's box offers some protection to the batter against an interference call, but that protection is not absolute.

Immediately following a pitch, the rules recognize the fact that the batter is precisely where the rules require her to be- in the batter's box and in a position to receive a pitch. She isn't expected to go "poof" and vanish the instant the catcher receives the ball.

As long as the batter remains in her position, and within the batter's box, the catcher is obligated to create her own throwing lane and manuveur around the batter. If the batter "stays put" and the throw hits her or the catcher bumps into her it is NOT interference.

If that would have been the case on this play, then the ball would remain live and any runners would have been awarded two bases when the throw went out of play. But that wasn't the case! Since the batter was out of the box, she has lost any protection it might have provided. Once the batter is out of the box, she is obligated to not interfere with the catcher or the throw- no matter what throwing lane the catcher takes and no matter if she meant to interfere or not.

Even when the batter stays inside the box, if she moves out of her initial "starting position" of receiving the pitch, she can still be guilty of interference. If she steps backward, forward, moves around in the box, leans out over the plate, takes a practice swing with the bat or otherwise abandons her initial spot, she could still be called for interference despite still being in the box. "Intent" is not relevant. The batter can accidentally interfere.

On these plays, the batter's best option is to "make like a statue" and hold her ground in whatever spot she started out. If she does that, then she should not be guilty of interference in any circumstance.

One more wrinkle on being in the batter's box: If there is a runner advancing to home plate, such as on a steal, bunt, wild pitch or passed ball, then the batter's obligation changes. When a runner is advancing to home, the batter must vacate ANY area needed by the defense to complete the play. In this case, the batter's box offers ZERO protection against an interference call!

This is a different scenario than being in the box immediately following a pitch where the catcher is throwing to a base, it is covered by a completely different rule and the batter has a completely different obligation to get out of the way.
 
default

default

Member
Bretman

Please take it a step further. Runner on second. Batter shows bunt and then pulls back the bat. Girls on second steals third. Umpire call interference. Batter made like a statue. Umpire said that the batter has to move to allow the catcher to throw the ball. What is the correct call. Furthermore, umpire later said that he made a mistake. The runner on second should have been out because of the batter interference. Is that correct.
 
default

default

Member
Thanks for the rules interpretation. Our batter was called out. Didn't decide the outcome of the game as our ladies battled back and won.
 
default

default

Member
Bretman

Please take it a step further. Runner on second. Batter shows bunt and then pulls back the bat. Girls on second steals third. Umpire call interference. Batter made like a statue. Umpire said that the batter has to move to allow the catcher to throw the ball. What is the correct call. Furthermore, umpire later said that he made a mistake. The runner on second should have been out because of the batter interference. Is that correct.

The umpire was absolutely right...when he said he made a mistake! :D

Batter should not have been called out for interference. On this kind of play, she DOES NOT have to move to accomodate the catcher. In fact, moving around from her legal batting position INCREASES the chance of an interference call.

At least this guy "fessed up" later on. I wonder what led to his epiphany? But even then he still had it wrong. On a batter interference call it is always the batter who is called out, not the runner.

There's only one circumstance where the runner on this play might get called out. If the pitch to the batter resulted in strike three, then she is no longer regarded as "a batter", but rather as a "retired batter" or "offensive team member". The batter would be out on the third strike and, in a case of genuine interference by the "retired batter", the runner being played upon would also be out. On this play, you're not really enforcing the "batter interference" rule, but the "interference by a retired batter" rule which is something altogether different!
 
Top