BI or not?

[sdix00]

R3, one out. 2-2 count. The next pitch is in the dirt and gets away from the catcher.  As R3 charges home, the catcher retrieves the ball and throws it to the pitcher covering the plate. The batter remained in the batter's box and did not make any other movement, but is accidentally hit with the throw allowing R3 to score.

 

What is your ruling?

 

 

[LMSANS]

Where did the ball go when it got away from the catcher?  If it's up the first base line and the batter is RH, I'm not sure I have anything.

[sdix00]

No More info.   There should be enough info to rule. 

[grayhawk]

As described, I have interference and R3 is out.  Interesting that you chose the words "did not make any other movement," but if the batter has an opportunity to vacate the area, it is incumbent upon him to do so.

[BRUMP]

As described, I have interference and R3 is out.  Interesting that you chose the words "did not make any other movement," but if the batter has an opportunity to vacate the area, it is incumbent upon him to do so.

 

I agree

[JaxRolo]

Also agree

[ALStripes17]

1 out? R3 is out due to BI. Every day that ends in 'y'.

[maven]

Are we applying OBR 6.06(c ), 7.08(g), 7.09(c ), or 7.11? Just curious.

[th3]

I thought "BI or not" was a pretty personal question!

[Rich Ives]

Think about what LMSANS said. It's only interference if he actually interfered.  If the throw came from the opposite direction and hit the batter after it passed F1-covering then it's "too bad" and a live ball.

[sdix00]

Sorry, I am mobile today. But I wanted to get this posted today. Here is reference play 378 from the 2014 WUM. I need help understanding it. I had been enforcing interference in this sitch on the premise that the batter must evacuate if he can. https://www.evernote.com/shard/s8/sh/e4c1d656-07c6-4023-b2c5-5458eee801c3/be6fa3d19916bd0e707a0e0b3e40e585 Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

[KenBAZ]

Interesting, even if B1 has time to get out of the way he doesn't have to move?

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk

[zoops]

That's a really odd interpretation IMO.   So, you make no attempt to get out of the way and it's not interference but you duck to try get out of the way and it's interference...doesn't really make sense.