LL - Interference by batter

[TC3]

Batter interference is usually when a batter interferes with the catcher on a play on R3 coming home. If less than 2 outs, runner is out. If two outs, batter is out.

Another type of batter interference is the rare batter (usually a catcher himself) who intentionally waves his bat around in front of the catcher in order to to distract the catcher to hinder his ability to catch the pitch. OR, he may take a reaching slow-speed backswing just before the pitch to hit the catcher's mitt to try to obtain a defensive interference call.

I know these are rare, but it's likely I will see it this year from one kid.

As the umpire, if you adjudge this action to be intentional (willful or deliberate) by the batter, then the penalty for it is two outs.

If there is a base runner - would you call both the batter and a runner out?

If there are multiple runners, would you get the one nearest the plate?

Thanks!

[BrianC14]

Batter interference is usually when a batter interferes with the catcher on a play on R3 coming home. If less than 2 outs, runner is out. If two outs, batter is out.

Another type of batter interference is the rare batter (usually a catcher himself) who intentionally waves his bat around in front of the catcher in order to to distract the catcher to hinder his ability to catch the pitch. OR, he may take a reaching slow-speed backswing just before the pitch to hit the catcher's mitt to try to obtain a defensive interference call.

I know these are rare, but it's likely I will see it this year from one kid.

As the umpire, if you adjudge this action to be intentional (willful or deliberate) by the batter, then the penalty for it is two outs.

If there is a base runner - would you call both the batter and a runner out?

If there are multiple runners, would you get the one nearest the plate?

Thanks!

Well, first of all, how is it you're calling catcher's INT on a backswing by the batter?

[TC3]

Hey - you're right! Let me re-phrase that...

What I meant was... an intentionally reaching swing to hit the mitt during a forward swing of the batt.

I only know about this because I've been told about a Dad here who did it for years when he was playing, and the rumor is that the Dad's kid may try it. I'll be calling some games the kids is playing in.

Anyway, with that correction, how woul dyou guys answer my original questions?

FWIW - if I can, I want to sting him for 2 outs if he intentionally distracts with the bat. If he does that swing trick, I intend to toss him.

Thanks.

[BrianC14]

Hey - you're right! Let me re-phrase that...

What I meant was... an intentionally reaching swing to hit the mitt during a forward swing of the batt.

I only know about this because I've been told about a Dad here who did it for years when he was playing, and the rumor is that the Dad's kid may try it. I'll be calling some games the kids is playing in.

Anyway, with that correction, how woul dyou guys answer my original questions?

FWIW - if I can, I want to sting him for 2 outs if he intentionally distracts with the bat. If he does that swing trick, I intend to toss him.

Thanks.

You know, Little League or not, I'd first suggest that you stop trying to invent your own rules and just umpire the game.

There is no such rule as "intentionally distracting with the bat".... unless you care to cite such rule from an actual rule set, that is.

:WTF

[TC3]

Hey! Thanks for playing.

I didn't say there was such a rule.

But there is certainly a set of rules prohibiting offensive interference with any fielder. It includes words such as "member of the team at bat" and "interferes with, obstructs, impedes, hinders, or confuses". This stuff is in the rule book. You should read one sometime.

My questions are straightforward. Is it reasonable to apply penalty for intentional interference to this type of activity?

Your inability to understand my query is your problem, not mine. If you don't have an answer to a question, you are allowed to not speak.

Anyone else?

Thanks.

[HokieUmp]

Hey! Thanks for playing.

I didn't say there was such a rule.

But there is certainly a set of rules prohibiting offensive interference with any fielder. It includes words such as "member of the team at bat" and "interferes with, obstructs, impedes, hinders, or confuses". This stuff is in the rule book. You should read one sometime.

My questions are straightforward. Is it reasonable to apply penalty for intentional interference to this type of activity?

Your inability to understand my query is your problem, not mine. If you don't have an answer to a question, you are allowed to not speak.

Anyone else?

Oooooh! Pick me! Pick me!

Here's the answer: you're wrong.

Want a second opinion?: you're being arrogant, even WHEN you're wrong. You know, it's like you're a player or coach.

Look, BrianC14 pretty much understood you just fine, and responded appropriately: you're making sh1t up.

There's nothing in the rulebook about distracting with the bat.** Trying to lump "distracting" with the bat in with all the other "impedes, hinders, or confuses the defense" is, again, making sh1t up.

(Maybe I'm too old-school for this, but one way to stop that crap is to drill the kid in the ribs when he pulls the "wave the bat" thing. Of course, since we're all about safety, I would never advocate that. I'm just sayin.)

But stepping with a call, of some sort, when a batter's waving the bat, is just OOO.

And under what justification/rule are you tossing the batter for hitting the glove with the bat? Or is this more ad-libbing? As a stretch, I could see it going like this: 1. batter is hitting mitt deliberately; 2. you tell him to stop; 3. he does it again; 4. you toss him for not complying with a directive. And yet that takes forever, since it's got to happen a few times to get that in.

But back to your response to Brian: he DID give you an answer. Just because you didn't like it, doesn't mean he failed to give one.

And my answer to "Is it reasonable to apply penalty for intentional interference to this type of activity?" is No.

H3lluva a way to get to:

**And yes, I've read a rulebook or two. I don't throw my experience out online much, but I went to the Evans pro school in '08. I managed a 94 test average on Jimmy's 14 tests. So while I may have been one/all of: too fat, too slow, too old, or too not-good-enough to get a shot at a pro job, I do know my way around a rulebook or two. And although BrianC14 can fight his own battles, he's seemed pretty handy with the rules, too.

[mstaylor]

Hey - you're right! Let me re-phrase that...

What I meant was... an intentionally reaching swing to hit the mitt during a forward swing of the batt.

I only know about this because I've been told about a Dad here who did it for years when he was playing, and the rumor is that the Dad's kid may try it. I'll be calling some games the kids is playing in.

Anyway, with that correction, how woul dyou guys answer my original questions?

FWIW - if I can, I want to sting him for 2 outs if he intentionally distracts with the bat. If he does that swing trick, I intend to toss him.

Thanks.

If you believe he is reaching for the mitt then just call the CI. If it happens more than once talk to his manager and explain that it shorten his day for trying to hurt the catcher. With that said it better be very, very obvious to go down that road.

The bat wagging before the pitch is absolutely nothing. If he hits the glove on a backswing then no pitch it and start over.

If you have a real BI then the batter is out and runner returns. The only time you get a second out is if the batter interferes on the third strike.

As far as Brian is concerned he has a tendency to answer shortly when guys are trying to make stuff up to meet their sense of right and wrong. Sometimes we see things that are bush league that we simply can't fix. I have argued many, many times over the years when guys don't like something, fake bunting and slap hitting being an example, try to make a rules interpretation that comes from a body oriface we won't mention to fix the "problem." That is just as wrong or bush league as what is being done.

I am not saying you are bush league because you came here to find out what you could and couldn't do. Now you have a better idea of what is correct.

[noumpere]

I didn't say there was such a rule.

Yes, you did. You said "the penalty for it is two outs."

My questions are straightforward. Is it reasonable to apply penalty for intentional interference to this type of activity?

That's a different question. No, it's not reasonable to apply this penalty to the actions you describe.

Your inability to understand my query is your problem, not mine.

Your inability to ask the right question leads to the confusion. Frankly, Brian was a lot kinder than I would have been had I been first to this thread.

[TC3]

Yes, you did. You said "the penalty for it is two outs."

No I didn't. You're quoting out of context (a favored activity in mainstream media these days, but not necessarily intelligent behavior).

As the umpire, if you adjudge this action to be intentional (willful or deliberate) by the batter, then the penalty for it is two outs.

In the context of the OP, it is not incorrect to say that any action by an offensive player that is adjudged willful and deliberate interference with a fielder is a 2-out penalty, as opposed to the 1-out penalty imposed for "not-deliberately-intentional" interference. Nowhere did I say that there is a specific rule against a batter intentionally distracting a catcher by waving the bat excessively in front of the catcher's face, or reaching to hit the catcher's mitt during the swing to attempt to draw a defensive interference call. If there were such a rule, I wouldn't have asked the question. 7.09a says it is interference if the batter hinders the catcher in an attempt to field the ball. That's all it says. As I stated in the OP, this generally applies to batter interfering with a fielder (catcher or pitcher) attempting a play on R3 stealing home. The question was whether it might also apply to a batter waving the bat in front of the catcher to hinder his ability to field a pitch. It's a reasonable question. And it even grows a little when you consider that, IF it is interference, AND IF it is deliberate, there is possible justification for a 2-out penalty.

Brian didn't like my question and told me to shutup.

I made fun of him.

Hokie didn't like that and accused me of being "like a player or coach". He's correct. Players and coaches are humans involved in baseball. Me too.

Hokie wanted to know why I'd toss a 12 year old boy for deliberately hitting another 12 year old boy with a baseball bat. My only response to that is: "Hokie - Why are you involved in kids sports at all?" BTW - If I get to 30 posts here, it will take more than a year. Don't sweat it.

Taylor sez you only get a 2nd out if it's interference on the 3rd strike. I haven't seen that LL rule, but I'll look for it.

FWIW - if I can, I want to sting him for 2 outs if he intentionally distracts with the bat.

That's a different question. No, it's not reasonable to apply this penalty to the actions you describe.

There's one man's opinion. Thanks.

Frankly, Brian was a lot kinder than I would have been had I been first to this thread.

Whew! Guess I got lucky! Nothing worse than punitive Times New Roman characters hurling thru space.

Lighten up, all of you.

[TC3]

...Trying to lump "distracting" with the bat in with all the other "impedes, hinders, or confuses the defense" is, again, making sh1t up.

If a player is taught he can distract the catcher by waving the bat around right up to the last second before a pitch, and the player decides to do it, I think you're wrong.

(Maybe I'm too old-school for this, but one way to stop that crap is to drill the kid in the ribs when he pulls the "wave the bat" thing. Of course, since we're all about safety, I would never advocate that. I'm just sayin.)

We agree that it's crap. It shouldn't be a part of baseball, especially at Majors and Juniors level. Kids should be taught to respect the game, not to play crap-ball.

My thinking is that if there are grounds for a 2-out penalty, it should be applied to strongly discourage this type of behavior. Your thinking is bean ball?

I'm still curious if there are other opinions out there. So I'll check back here tomorrow or the next day, but I'm done posting on this thread.

Thanks.

[Big Red]

...but I'm done posting on this thread.

Wow...I'll give you some credit for saving the best for last and allowing us to sleep better tonight! :wave:

[mstaylor]

TC3;41804]If a player is taught he can distract the catcher by waving the bat around right up to the last second before a pitch, and the player decides to do it, I think you're wrong.

It is nothing. They can bat wave all they like. It has been argued, presented to LL for their congress, all kinds of solutions and it is still nothing. There is no justification for getting two outs.

We agree that it's crap. It shouldn't be a part of baseball, especially at Majors and Juniors level. Kids should be taught to respect the game, not to play crap-ball.

My thinking is that if there are grounds for a 2-out penalty, it should be applied to strongly discourage this type of behavior. Your thinking is bean ball?

He isn't suggesting a beanball, in fact he discounts it, mearly mentions that at one time a ball in the ribs was a solution.

I'm still curious if there are other opinions out there. So I'll check back here tomorrow or the next day, but I'm done posting on this thread.

Thanks.

As far as the second out because it was the third strike, anytime you have an actual BI and it is the third strike the batter is out, you can't call him out a second time so you get the runner.

No answer given has meant to belittle or even that argumentative. A lot of us have been doing this a long time and have seen more than a few that have tried to make the rulebook match their belief system. That is not what our advocation is about. Our job is to report what is going on during the game. We are not there to make things balanced or even to protect kids. We are there to fairly apply the rules, make calls impartially and to see that one team or the other doesn't gain an advantage no intended by the rules.

Many times that means many times we enforce penalties for safety violations and rule on things that covered by the rules, sometimes rule on things not covered.

In your OP it is covered by the rules, it has been correctly explained, no need to go to any esoteric interps or involve 9.01c. I don't know your experience level or rules knowledge, to tell you the truth it's irrelevant, but our purpose is to try and share our years of study and experience. I only ask that ou not fall into the trap of asking a question, disliking the answer and then lashing out at the poster.

[Big Red]

Couldn't be better said, Mike!

[noumpere]

No I didn't. You're quoting out of context (a favored activity in mainstream media these days, but not necessarily intelligent behavior).

Okay, then. Here is your entire quote:

"As the umpire, if you adjudge this action to be intentional (willful or deliberate) by the batter, then the penalty for it is two outs."

That's wrong. It's not two outs. It's not even one out.

Unless, of course, you're just making SH*# up.

[HokieUmp]

Okay, then. Here is your entire quote:

"As the umpire, if you adjudge this action to be intentional (willful or deliberate) by the batter, then the penalty for it is two outs."

That's wrong. It's not two outs. It's not even one out.

Unless, of course, you're just making SH*# up.

Thanks, noumpere - I started to write a longer reply, but realized it was sort of pointless. When the OPoster says "A", and then later says "I didn't say 'A'," there's not much one can do. And when said poster begins to dance around and change things, there's even less one can do.

So I return to my original response:

Rat Troll.

You [TC3] may go away now.

[TC3]

Still here. I'll break my word and post one more reply.

Couple of posts up, taylor reports that:

It is nothing. They can bat wave all they like. It has been argued, presented to LL for their congress, all kinds of solutions and it is still nothing. There is no justification for getting two outs.

As a new umpire, how am I supposed to know that history?

I saw a situation, and asked a question about it.

Six or eight guys replied with dimeaning attitude, condescending comments, and no help at all.

Then one guy sez - Nope, it's already been discussed and argued for years, and has been decided at league levels that there is no penalty, etc, etc.

Okay. Thanks!

For the record - if someone asks a simple question and you are able to provide a simple answer, just toss out the simple answer if you feel like it.

If you can't provide a simple answer, you're allowed to remain silent. If you choose instead to go with the insulting condescending line of drivel, you are in fact an old woman.

All you old women shut your mouths already. Cheese and RICE.

Edited April 27, 2010 by mstaylor

[TC3]

1 more...

Cracks me up too much.

All these clowns telling me I'm making SH*# up. Turns out it's been discussed and argued at LL Congress, etc.

LMFAO.

See ya.

[mstaylor]

The reason it has been discussed because this comes up every year and guys are told it is nothing and they then try to bend the rules to make it illegal. Bat wagging, fake bunting and 7.13 are three things that come up repearedly to LLcongress and it never comes close. Time to stop the sniping both ways.