How should this have been called?

[wek29]

I was BU at a game the other night and had this happen. R3, I am in C. For some reason the pitcher set up like he's going to throw from the windup. The base coach sends the runner too soon as the pitcher had not begun his windup. Right handed pitcher steps off with his right foot and throws home. I assume the batter doesn't realize the pitcher stepped off and takes a swing at it. The catcher moves up to make the play, I don't know if he knew the pitcher stepped off, and gets nailed in the arm by the batter. What's your call?

Plate umpire called Catcher interference, let the run score and sent the batter to 1st. He said he knew the pitcher setpped off, but not why he didn't think that was important.

[UmpJM]

wek29,

The proper call in this sitch is interference on the batter.

If there were less than 2 outs, the R3 is called out and the batter continues his at bat.

If there were 2 outs, the batter is out and the half inning is over.

You're PU didn't know what he was doing.

JM

[buddywilshire]

wek29,

The proper call in this sitch is interference on the batter.

If there were less than 2 outs, the R3 is called out and the batter continues his at bat.

If there were 2 outs, the batter is out and the half inning is over.

You're PU didn't know what he was doing.

JM

Why would the R3 be called it if less then two outs and the batter be called out with two outs? To me the interference makes R3 out either way. Not saying you are wrong, just never had that happened so I wondered.

Not sure how this is catcher interference at all.

[noumpere]

Why would the R3 be called it if less then two outs and the batter be called out with two outs? To me the interference makes R3 out either way. Not saying you are wrong, just never had that happened so I wondered.

Not sure how this is catcher interference at all.

It's not CI, it's BI. BI interfered with a THROW from F1 to F2.

JM accurately explained the rule. I'm not sure if you're asking whether JM is correct, or wondering WHY the rule is the way it is. It's that way to maximize the penalty on the offense. In general, the person who interferes is out. That's the batter. The play in question is one of the exceptions to that general rule.

[wek29]

My gut instinct was the PU didn't see the pitcher step off and then when I brought it up just said he knew it. For whatever reason, he didn't want to come to me when it happened.

[buddywilshire]

It's not CI, it's BI. BI interfered with a THROW from F1 to F2.

JM accurately explained the rule. I'm not sure if you're asking whether JM is correct, or wondering WHY the rule is the way it is. It's that way to maximize the penalty on the offense. In general, the person who interferes is out. That's the batter. The play in question is one of the exceptions to that general rule.

Just wondering why it is the way it is. Makes sense that it it maxmizes the penalty. Makes sense to me.

Wek29 I agree with you, I'm betting your partner didn't see him step off.

[rulebook]

OBR 6.06©: A batter is out for illegal action when he interferes with the catcher’s fielding or throwing by stepping out of the batter’s box or making any other movement that hinders the catcher’s play at home base.

EXCEPTION: Batter is not out if any runner attempting to advance is put out, or if runner trying to score is called out for batter’s interference.

OBR 7.08(g): Any runner is out when he attempts to score on a play in which the batter interferes with the play at home base before two are out. With two out, the interference puts the batter out and no score counts.

[yawetag]

Just wondering why it is the way it is. Makes sense that it it maxmizes the penalty. Makes sense to me.

With less than two outs, the runner is out and the batter remains at bat. With two outs, the batter is out.

If the rule were simply that the runner is out all the time, a coach could purposely have BI (with R3 stealing home) with two outs and two strikes -- R3 is called out, but your star batter gets another AB in the next inning.

If the rule were simply that the batter is out all the time, a coach could purposely have BI (with R3 stealing home) with no outs -- batter is called out, and your star batter gets to come up to bat.

[mazzamouth]

Why would the R3 be called it if less then two outs and the batter be called out with two outs? To me the interference makes R3 out either way. Not saying you are wrong, just never had that happened so I wondered.

Not sure how this is catcher interference at all.

it's called the WFU rule, it think it is rule 11-1.. the Who F*&ked up rule.. the batter messed up and you punish the team who screwed up, this is a easy way to think about it.

[mazzamouth]

Why would the R3 be called it if less then two outs and the batter be called out with two outs? To me the interference makes R3 out either way. Not saying you are wrong, just never had that happened so I wondered.

Not sure how this is catcher interference at all.

It is BI.. the pitcher stepped off which makes him a Infielder, not a pitcher, the batter can't hit a thrown ball, only a pitched ball...

I posted on another thread.. you should really read the book, and not just look at the cover, there is a lot of good information inside...LOL

[mazzamouth]

My gut instinct was the PU didn't see the pitcher step off and then when I brought it up just said he knew it. For whatever reason, he didn't want to come to me when it happened.

then you could have gone to him, and asked what he had.. if he said the pitcher didnt step off, you could have informed him that he did.. and if he punished the wrong guy, you could have told him..

[okump96]

no mazz, he SHOULD have told him.

[mazzamouth]

no mazz, he SHOULD have told him.

yea that could have worked too...LOL

[buddywilshire]

It is BI.. the pitcher stepped off which makes him a Infielder, not a pitcher, the batter can't hit a thrown ball, only a pitched ball...

I posted on another thread.. you should really read the book, and not just look at the cover, there is a lot of good information inside...LOL

That is what I said, not sure what you are talking about.

[mazzamouth]

That is what I said, not sure what you are talking about.

what do you mean?