Backswing INT or nothing???

[hill2933]

Varsity game tonight 3-2 game bottom 6. Two outs and R2 when batter takes huge cut at pitch and misses. F2 comes up and appears (to me at least) to be preparing to make a throw. F2 bladed his shoulders and stepped toward plate as he was coming up so it did not look like a normal throw back to F1. Batter's backswing comes around and catches F2 in the back. F2 dropped the ball and went to the ground. I called time and as I looked up R2 was advancing toward third. I got together with my partner to see if he thought F2 was trying to make a play and then called R2 out for the third out. HT coach was arguing that F2 was just throwing the ball back to the pitcher and R2 was not stealing. F2 did not move toward third like R2 was running so it looked more like he was going to throw to second. Would you get an INF on this or just kill it and send R2 back?

 

 

[tjwoelfel13]

If he was preparing to throw to second yes I would have INT on this.

[Dash Riprock]

If you had backswing INT, the batter should have been out, not the runner.

[bbman]

I agree with tjwoelfel13

[maven]

You're posting in the HS forum, so I'm assuming the question pertains to the FED rule.

 

FED has no backswing INT rule distinct from batter INT. It's batter INT or nothing.

 

You have to rule on whether F2 was making a play. If so, then it's INT, otherwise, it's nothing.

 

If you rule INT, the ball is dead at the end of playing action: if F2's first throw retired a runner, then the INT is ignored; otherwise, the batter is out and runners return. Since F2 made no throw on this play, you'd enforce the penalty for BI.

 

If you rule nothing, there is no basis in FED rules for returning R2 to 2B.

 

I can't help on whether F2 was making a play unless you have some video to share.

[noumpere]

If you had backswing INT, the batter should have been out, not the runner.

Generally true, but here the batter was already out for strike 3.

 

Maven is correct on the ruling.

 

On the judgment -- had F2 previously shown a willingness to throw to second?  Was R2 "far" off the base?  Was F6 or F4 moving to cover?  It *might* have been just a bluff.

[maven]

Generally true, but here the batter was already out for strike 3.

I don't see that in the OP. The score was 3-2...

[hill2933]

You're posting in the HS forum, so I'm assuming the question pertains to the FED rule.

 

FED has no backswing INT rule distinct from batter INT. It's batter INT or nothing.

 

You have to rule on whether F2 was making a play. If so, then it's INT, otherwise, it's nothing.

 

If you rule INT, the ball is dead at the end of playing action: if F2's first throw retired a runner, then the INT is ignored; otherwise, the batter is out and runners return. Since F2 made no throw on this play, you'd enforce the penalty for BI.

 

If you rule nothing, there is no basis in FED rules for returning R2 to 2B.

 

I can't help on whether F2 was making a play unless you have some video to share.

When F2 was hit it caused him to drop the ball. R2 advanced to third  while the ball was on the ground. If you don't have INT would you let runners continue to advance?

[maven]

When F2 was hit it caused him to drop the ball. R2 advanced to third  while the ball was on the ground. If you don't have INT would you let runners continue to advance?

If I don't have INT, I have no choice.

 

But then again, I'm probably calling INT if this happens with runners on. 7-3-5c says the batter shall not...

 

"Interfere with the catcher's fielding or throwing by:

 

c. making any other movement, including backswing interference, which hinders actions at home plate or the catcher's attempt to play on a runner"

[catsbackr]

And, you gotta get this call yourself.  Don't go to your partner, decide if you have batter's interference or not and call it if you do.  No need for a conference here.

 

Sometimes, you gotta umpire.