Batter throws bat

[jjskitours]

I seem to recall this issue was addressed before, but I don't recall if there was ever a consensus. Runner at second base, one out, left-handed batter with a 3-1 count. His dugout is the third base dugout. Pitcher throws Ball Four. The batter flips his back towards the third-base dugout as the catcher throws the ball back to the pitcher. The bat in the air hits the thrown ball and the ball and bat land in foul territory near the third-base dugout as R2 advances to third base. What's the call? Same situation and the ball rolls out of play. Fed and OBR if ruling is different.

 

[ElkOil]

3 minutes ago, jjskitours said:

I seem to recall this issue was addressed before, but I don't recall if there was ever a consensus. Runner at second base, one out, left-handed batter with a 3-1 count. His dugout is the third base dugout. Pitcher throws Ball Four. The batter flips his back towards the third-base dugout as the catcher throws the ball back to the pitcher. The bat in the air hits the thrown ball and the ball and bat land in foul territory near the third-base dugout as R2 advances to third base. What's the call? Same situation and the ball rolls out of play. Fed and OBR if ruling is different.

 

I haven't bothered to look this up, but I'd kill it and not allow the offense to take any extra bases. The defense shouldn't realize a disadvantage in this scenario.

@maven, over to you...

[Cav]

NFHS 7.3.5 SITUATION I: With a runner on third base and one out, B3 receives ball four for a base on balls. B3 takes several steps toward first base and then realizes he is still holding onto the bat. With his dugout on the third base side, he stops and tosses the bat in front of home plate towards his bench. As he tosses the bat, F2 throws the ball to third in an attempt to put out R1. The ball contacts the bat in mid-air and is deflected into dead-ball territory.  RULING: The ball is dead. Interference is declared on the batter. If R1 had been attempting to steal home, R1 would be declared out and B3 awarded first base on the base on balls. If R1 was attempting to return to third base on the play, B3 is declared out for the interference. (7-3-5)

[ElkOil]

2 minutes ago, Cav said:

NFHS 7.3.5 SITUATION I: With a runner on third base and one out, B3 receives ball four for a base on balls. B3 takes several steps toward first base and then realizes he is still holding onto the bat. With his dugout on the third base side, he stops and tosses the bat in front of home plate towards his bench. As he tosses the bat, F2 throws the ball to third in an attempt to put out R1. The ball contacts the bat in mid-air and is deflected into dead-ball territory.  RULING: The ball is dead. Interference is declared on the batter. If R1 had been attempting to steal home, R1 would be declared out and B3 awarded first base on the base on balls. If R1 was attempting to return to third base on the play, B3 is declared out for the interference. (7-3-5)

There's an important difference between this case play and the OP. In the OP, R2 wasn't stealing. So would we still call INT and declare the batter out? If R2 wasn't going anywhere, and the catcher wasn't trying to put the runner out, there's no hindrance.

[Cav]

I'm treating it just like what we used to call "weak interference" on the return toss.  No one was trying to advance and no one was trying to make outs.  So, shut it down, have the bat picked up, the ball exchanged, R2 stays on 2B and the BR complete his awarded BB.  Stupid lefty! 

 

[jjskitours]

Yes there is a key difference. No doubt there is INT if F2 was throwing toward 3rd base in an attempt to throw out R2 stealing.

[jjskitours]

I was typing when Cav made his response of "weak Interference". Can I get an Amen on that. I seem to recall from a previous thread that some said it was "play on" as there were only two options - call INT or do nothing and play on. There was no option to call "Time"  and return R2 back to 2nd and award B-R 1st even though I agree it makes the most sense.

[ElkOil]

1 hour ago, Cav said:

I'm treating it just like what we used to call "weak interference" on the return toss.  No one was trying to advance and no one was trying to make outs.  So, shut it down, have the bat picked up, the ball exchanged, R2 stays on 2B and the BR complete his awarded BB.  Stupid lefty! 

 

I'm confused. Do we agree?

[Donny7]

1 hour ago, ElkOil said:

I'm confused. Do we agree?

Yes we agree Elk. Your first reply was correct.

The ball was being returned to F1, R2 was NOT attempting to steal 3B. Call immediate Dead Ball. No runners advance.

[noumpere]

This came up in a rules study group for NCAA baseball a few years ago.  We asked the secretary rules editor at the time.  His answer was the same as for FED:  This is INT (and someone is going to be out).

 

I prefer the "weak interference" ruling, but I'm not really sure it's supported in NCAA or FED.

[jjskitours]

8 hours ago, noumpere said:

This came up in a rules study group for NCAA baseball a few years ago.  We asked the secretary rules editor at the time.  His answer was the same as for FED:  This is INT (and someone is going to be out).

 

I prefer the "weak interference" ruling, but I'm not really sure it's supported in NCAA or FED.

Including what I recall from a 2015 thread, there have been 3 different rulings when R2 is not stealing and the throw is simply from F2 to F1. 1.) Batter is out for INT 2.) Weak INT and R2 remains at 2nd and B-R walks to 1st. 3.) Play the bounce which if it goes out of play would score R2 and I guess B-R would get 2nd base. Although No. 3 seems absurd, I believe this was the final ruling from 2015 thread (not sure the out of play option was discussed, but R2 advanced to 3rd). If anyone has a FED interpretation and/or NCAA or OBR ruling, please provide it.  

[jjskitours]

18 hours ago, jjskitours said:

Including what I recall from a 2015 thread, there have been 3 different rulings when R2 is not stealing and the throw is simply from F2 to F1. 1.) Batter is out for INT 2.) Weak INT and R2 remains at 2nd and B-R walks to 1st. 3.) Play the bounce which if it goes out of play would score R2 and I guess B-R would get 2nd base. Although No. 3 seems absurd, I believe this was the final ruling from 2015 thread (not sure the out of play option was discussed, but R2 advanced to 3rd). If anyone has a FED interpretation and/or NCAA or OBR ruling, please provide it.  

Sure would like to get some authoritative interpretation or a consensus from 5 or 6 umpires as to the proper ruling for this situation.

[noumpere]

20 minutes ago, jjskitours said:

Sure would like to get some authoritative interpretation or a consensus from 5 or 6 umpires as to the proper ruling for this situation.

Define proper:

 

A)  If you mean what the case book says, then you have the answer above.

 

B) If you mean what most of us think the "right" ruling would be, well, you also have that.

 

A and B are different, however.

[Cav]

8 hours ago, ElkOil said:

I'm confused. Do we agree?

A common occurrence I've often observed in my partners over the years. 

I put out that NFHS case play to remind all that spit can and usually does happen.  

The "weak interference" reference was my J/R background from the early 90s leaking out.