Catchers Interference..? i banged him for it....

[Rich Ives]

The best teacher/umpire I know stressed-

you can't have INT without interference!

did everyone do what they meant to do? was anyone hindered? If the batter watches a pitch go by with his bat on his shoulder and the catcher gets a bit antsy and comes out of his crouch to make a play, and his big toe touches the point of the plate, you are gonna point and scream "that's interference!" and THAT makes sense to you?

 

Yes.  The catcher is forbidden to enter that space. He did.

 

Maybe the pitchers throw very slow lobs where you live but most places the catcher has to get out in front of the plate almost at the instant the pitcher releases the ball in order to catch it there. So as a result the batter doesn't swing and you claim it's not interference?

 

How do you call the pitch again?

[dddunn3d]

Face it, you are wrong. But, call it the way you feel.

I will, if you get a real dog.

No need to resort to attacking my dog (actually the ex- has him, that bitch).

Besides, I'll have you know, sir, that that happens to be the best dog that ever graced the face of the earth!

[NFUA_44]

Anybody who breaks out a J/R and reads Chapter 14 will easily see how far he is trying to stretch to hold onto this silliness.  He has quoted two parts of a complete section, which if you take it in total you will see it for what it is, a breakdown of what is and what isn't CI.  The six example of what isn't CI has to do with a batter that bails out of the box, a batter that throws a bat at the catcher or tries to nail him in foul ground or to break up a pitch out.  All three sample plays have to do with these contingencies.

 

He has answered his own question in his first part:

(2) the catcher is on or forward of the tip of home plate (or "on fair territory") to get the pitch and prevents the batter's opportunity to swing at or bunt such pitch. [7.07]

All along F2 has caught the pitch before it crosses the plate so I guess he would have to be on or in front of the plate,

 

The defenition is crystal clear, the rule cites are there, the professional interps point it all out to you, stop trying to make sh!t up.  When you get to a position where you have to attack peoples dogs on here you have lost all credability.  JMO.

 

I'm out.

[BalkHawk]

where does it say the batter "bails out of the box?" It reads "completely gives up his opportunity to swing or bunt at a pitch."

Calling out somebody for their dog IS ridiculous; about as ridiculous as generalizing facts like "J/R have fallen out of favor" or tying to make an argument by saying, "face it, you are wrong." Or, best of all, hurling an insult that I can't fathom like, maybe all the pitchers throw slow lobs where I'm from. Even if you are sure you are right, there's no reason to be a dick about it.

Now if you feel that I am misreading what it means to 'completely give up' an attempt to hit a pitch, that I may consider.

[NFUA_44]

The sample plays in Chapter 14 should illuminate it for you.  You can not read his mind and decide what he wanted to do with the pitch.  If he takes some kind of extra ordinary action, like leaving the box, or trying to hit F2 and not the ball, that is what they are trying to make clear.  Bottom line your trying to award the defense for being stupid.  Screw those who screwed up.

[mstaylor]

BalkHawk, I don't understand your desire to take the minority position when the rules and interps are fairly black letter. The catcher has committed an illegal action, the rules define the remedy but you insist on rewarding the defense. I have taken the minority position in the past, sometimes I was right, other times not. Just remember the adage,"When it's you against the world, bet on the world."

[BalkHawk]

Try this one.

R1, no out, OBR. (this play actually happened last night in an MLB game.)

Lefty up to bat. Pitch out. F2 pops out of his crouch early. As he takes the pitch, his left foot lands even with the middle of the plate, however he is in the righty batter's box.

You still have INT?

Believe it or not, the MLB PU did not call defensive interference. He even managed to call a pitch that never crossed the plate.

[mrumpiresir]

Try this one.

R1, no out, OBR. (this play actually happened last night in an MLB game.)

Lefty up to bat. Pitch out. F2 pops out of his crouch early. As he takes the pitch, his left foot lands even with the middle of the plate, however he is in the righty batter's box.

You still have INT?

Believe it or not, the MLB PU did not call defensive interference. He even managed to call a pitch that never crossed the plate.

So what does this have to do with your incorrect interpretations of the rule?

[NFUA_44]

Try this one.

R1, no out, OBR. (this play actually happened last night in an MLB game.)

Lefty up to bat. Pitch out. F2 pops out of his crouch early. As he takes the pitch, his left foot lands even with the middle of the plate, however he is in the righty batter's box.

You still have INT?

Believe it or not, the MLB PU did not call defensive interference. He even managed to call a pitch that never crossed the plate.

So what does this have to do with your incorrect interpretations of the rule?

So according to your "new" theory based on this play that isn't related, I guess all MLB F2's can now jump up and grab the incoming pitch so they get a couple of steps ahead on their throw to 2nd to retire the runner.  That's a sweet deal.  Pitcher's won't ever have to worry about holding another runner on base since F2 can do such amazing things.

 

Come on dude give it up.  Or don't.  Your only holding yourself up in the end.

 

ON EDIT:  didn't realize sna tch was a filtered word, so I changed it!

Edited April 9, 2013 by NFUA_44

[BalkHawk]

I didn't realize you are the ultimate authority on this subject.

I'm not saying I'm gonna go searching for an excuse not to call defensive INT. I'm saying this CAN be "nothing".

Then again, I was a land surveyor for many years. Every once in a while, we would do an elevation run on a sewer system. This is where I learned the literal meaning of "the SH*#ty end of the stick."

It is my opinion, and also the opinion of a certain ex-MLB umpire/pro-school instructor that if you call INT on F2 without it being quite obvious he stepped on the plate and without any attempt by the batter, you will then have hands which are covered with SH*#, figuratively speaking, of course.

Some folks like that...

[NFUA_44]

I didn't realize you are the ultimate authority on this subject.

I'm not saying I'm gonna go searching for an excuse not to call defensive INT. I'm saying this CAN be "nothing".

Then again, I was a land surveyor for many years. Every once in a while, we would do an elevation run on a sewer system. This is where I learned the literal meaning of "the SH*#ty end of the stick."

It is my opinion, and also the opinion of a certain ex-MLB umpire/pro-school instructor that if you call INT on F2 without it being quite obvious he stepped on the plate and without any attempt by the batter, you will then have hands which are covered with ######, figuratively speaking, of course.

Some folks like that...

Naw, the JEA and WUM are the authorities here, J/R is a source.  I'm just an umpire, about the only thing I have authority over is my 13 year old son, for now anyway!

[BalkHawk]

from the JEA:

Professional Interpretation: Catcher interference is any physical act which interferes with the batter while he is

preparing or attempting to offer at a pitched ball.

I highlighted the important part. If CI is any physical act that causes the INT during the Preparation or execution of that swing, it's pretty clear you don't need a swing. I would say the J/R Interp has more to do with another situation where you have a batter that bails out of the box or does something else very unorthodox to abandon his station.

I own the Jaska/Roder and appreciate it for the work they put into it, but in all honesty I will usually take the words and wisdom of Jim Evans. This information is from the text of 6.08 c in the JEA beginning on page 152.

You highlighted the important part, but you failed to read it. You don't need a swing, but you DO need an attempt (a stride or a check swing) or a preparation (squaring to bunt).

[BalkHawk]

Naw, the JEA and WUM are the authorities here, J/R is a source.

They are all sources (and great ones, at that) as far as I can tell. To my knowledge, only one has language adopted directly by the OBR.

[mstaylor]

Actually MLBUM is the authority, the other three are sources. 

but you DO need an attempt (a stride or a check swing) or a preparation (squaring to bunt).

Squaring to bunt is the same as a check swing. 

[NFUA_44]

from the JEA:

Professional Interpretation: Catcher interference is any physical act which interferes with the batter while he is

preparing or attempting to offer at a pitched ball.

I highlighted the important part. If CI is any physical act that causes the INT during the Preparation or execution of that swing, it's pretty clear you don't need a swing. I would say the J/R Interp has more to do with another situation where you have a batter that bails out of the box or does something else very unorthodox to abandon his station.

I own the Jaska/Roder and appreciate it for the work they put into it, but in all honesty I will usually take the words and wisdom of Jim Evans. This information is from the text of 6.08 c in the JEA beginning on page 152. You highlighted the important part, but you failed to read it. You don't need a swing, but you DO need an attempt (a stride or a check swing) or a preparation (squaring to bunt).

Nope didn't fail to read  it, I'm just failing to understand your logic is all.  Your the only one to support this side of it, and anyone that reads Chapter 14 of the J/R can easily see what they are getting at which you would have to stretch a country mile to support.

 

Hey, it's all good.  I'm always happy to go diving for stuff in any manual, it only serves to improve my knowledge base whether I agree or not with someone else.

 

And Michael, thank you for the clarification you are absolutely correct.  The MLBUM is THE Authority, with the WUM, JEA, and J/R playing their supporting parts.

I'm out.