Batter continuously benefiting from Catcher Interference

[kstrunk]

Hey Guys,

 

In our local league, I recently called Catcher Interference on a catcher when the batter's bat struck the catcher's mitt, resulting in a foul ball. I called it and awarded the batter 1st base. I thought it was a bit peculiar, because I usually note when the catcher is too far into the batter. 

 

I found out last night that In the past week, 2 other umpires made the same call for the same batter, against 2 different teams. Total of 3 umps, 3 teams, 3 catchers, 1 batter, same deal. The other umps are not aware of any of this yet, to my knowledge.

 

1 of the catchers was my son. He's telling me this batter waits until the pitcher starts his move, then backs up, and also drops his hands low enough to hit the catcher's mitt before he swings. 

 

This is LL Majors baseball that is VERY competitive in our league. If this kid is intentionally striking the catcher's mitts to get on base, what to do? 

[Mike Prince]

If his feet remain within the batter's box, not much you can do IMO.

Sent using Tapatalk

[grayhawk]

Agreed with @Mike Prince. Only thing you can do is be cognizant of the batter moving out of the box. Otherwise, it's up to the coaches to instruct their catchers to stay back on this batter.

This doesn't happen in higher level ball because the players would take care of it.

[Senor Azul]

Of course, the batter is not allowed to do this. The infraction can be very difficult to see but if you do see it, call it.

 

Here's the official interpretation shown in Carl Childress' BRD (2011 edition): Mike Fitzpatrick 11/15/00--The batter may not deliberately attempt to create a catcher's interference call. PENALTY: The ball is dead, strike, and runners do not advance. If the swing hits the catcher, the umpire shall eject the batter. No out is charged unless the batter has two strikes. "The umpire must be ABSOLUTELY certain that the batter was attempting to create the catcher's interference and not attempting to swing at the pitched ball."

 

Additionally, the Jaksa/Roder manual says it is not catcher's interference if the batter tries to hit the catcher versus the pitch. Here's a sample play from their manual: R3, stealing. The batter takes two or three steps backward during the pitch. Catcher's interference is no longer possible.

[Senor Azul]

Forgot to mention that I am very impressed that you followed up on this. The kid who is doing this is not only cheating, but he is a huge safety hazard.  Put a stop to this as quickly as possible. You and your son probably have saved someone a broken finger or hand. Good job!

[maven]

If I knew this kid was doing this on purpose, I'd have no problem using the PBUC interp from Fitzpatrick. That seems to be what fairness dictates, the batter is not being hindered if his intent is to hit the mitt, and I agree that the batter's ploy is quite dangerous. Indeed, it might qualify as assault.

 

I also agree that I'd have to be certain. I've never heard of this before.

[PGOLDEN88]

Next time he tries that with you as PU, he'll learn that he overdrafted the luck bank.