called strike 3 then batter interference

[bengalvfan]

I had one of these last night in a Junior little league and it caught me a bit off guard at first.

I had no outs, R2, 1 ball 2 strikes. Called third strike on the batter, runner is stealing, retired batter interferes with catchers throw to third base. I called both out as 7.09 E says to do but I have a question.

First here is 7.09 E:

"Any batter or runner who has just been put out hinders or impedes any following play being made on a runner. Such runner shall be declared out for interference by a teammate;"

My question is according the NFHS case book in this situation I have to judge whether or not I think the catcher could have retired R2. If I don't think he would have gotten an out here, I put him back on second and play on with only getting the out on the batter from striking out. Is this a difference in the rules, or was I supposed to judge whether or not the catcher could have gotten an out in little league as well?

NFHS case play:

"7.3.5 SITUATION C

With R1 on first base, one out and two strikes on B3, R1 attempts to steal second base. B3 swings and misses the pitch and interferes with F2's attempt to throw out R1.

RULING: B3 has struck out. If, in the umpire's judgment, F2 could have put out R1, the umpire can call him out also. If not, R1 is returned to first base. """"""

[Rich Ives]

What did the batter do to interfere? It might just matter.

[bengalvfan]

What did the batter do to interfere? It might just matter.

Well it was not intentional if that is what you are getting at.

But what the right handed batter actually did was after the called strike 3 he took a few steps towards his team dugout (1st base side) and stepped right in front of the catcher making a throw down to third base.

[Rich Ives]

What did the batter do to interfere? It might just matter.

Well it was not intentional if that is what you are getting at.

But what the right handed batter actually did was after the called strike 3 he took a few steps towards his team dugout (1st base side) and stepped right in front of the catcher making a throw down to third base.

Not getting at intentional.

Some believe that it's always interference even if the batter stays frozen in the box so I wanted to check.

ALSO, if it's backswing interference then the runner is out if thrown out otherwise he returns to the TOP base.

So what happened IS a need to know thing.,

Thanks.

And -curious again, how did he take "a few steps" toward the first base side and still be in the line of fire to third base? [Don't punish the batter for a sucky play by the catcher]

[bengalvfan]

What did the batter do to interfere? It might just matter.

Well it was not intentional if that is what you are getting at.

But what the right handed batter actually did was after the called strike 3 he took a few steps towards his team dugout (1st base side) and stepped right in front of the catcher making a throw down to third base.

Not getting at intentional.

Some believe that it's always interference even if the batter stays frozen in the box so I wanted to check.

ALSO, if it's backswing interference then the runner is out if thrown out otherwise he returns to the TOP base.

So what happened IS a need to know thing.,

Thanks.

And -curious again, how did he take "a few steps" toward the first base side and still be in the line of fire to third base? [Don't punish the batter for a sucky play by the catcher]

Thanks.

So is what I said correct as far as under little league rules I dont have to worry about if I think the catcher would or would not have gotten the runner out on his throw that was interfered with since the runner will always be out in my scenario whether or not he was or wasn't going to be safe by a mile?

It is cut in dry in the NFHS ruleset that if I think the runner would of made it to third safely if there was no interference that I just simply put the runner back on 2B.

I am basically asking if this is a rule difference or am I suppose to rule on whether or not the runner would have been out or not at 3B under Little League rules?

[Rich Ives]

In OBR/LL interference happens and is called before you know the outcome. If it's not backswing then the runner is out - period. If it is backswing then an out stands if achieved other wise the runner returns.

You sure about the FED ruling?

[UmpJM]

OhioUmp,

Yes, it IS a rule difference between HS/FED and other codes.

In OBR-based codes (like LL) and NCAA the runner is out when the just-retired batter interferes with his play on a runner. No judgement onw whether or not the runner would have been out is required.

FED adds the "if he would have been out" criteria, though 99%+ of the time and FED umpire will "judge" that the runner would have been out absent the interference.

JM

[mstaylor]

I had a thread about this exact interp earlier this year. I had a batter out on strikes interfere with the catcher's throw to second. I banged the R1 and got protested. I showed him the rule after the game and said he could have gotten the out so the runner is out. That takes it from a rules interp to a judgement call. It is a difference indigenous to Fed.