Batter's interference or not?

[maven]

Look at players immediately after throw...B is croutched, F2 follow-through into the batter's box.

When F2 move towards B to make a throw, I start thinking he's trying to initate hinderance.

Initiate hindrance? That's not a thing.

 

Who's restricted? The batter needs to stay in the box (and not make any other motion yadayada). If he does that, he's golden. If not, then he's liable for BI.

 

The ruling here was no BI. Do you suppose PU ruled that:

 

(a) there was hindrance, but that F2 hindered himself, or

(b) that there was no hindrance?

 

I know where my bet would go.

[ricka56]

 

Look at players immediately after throw...B is croutched, F2 follow-through into the batter's box.

When F2 move towards B to make a throw, I start thinking he's trying to initate hinderance.

Initiate hindrance? That's not a thing.

 

Are you trying to nit pick my choice of words or have you never seen an F2 try to draw a BI call ?

 

The ruling here was no BI. Do you suppose PU ruled that:

 

(a) nice try, buddy, but you ain't suckering me into making that call  there was hindrance, but that F2 hindered himself, or

(b) that there was no hindrance?

 

I know where my bet would go.

 

Fixed one of the choices for you.

[JaxRolo]

Batter was tripped up by F2 when he got stepped on. Anything after that is not batters fault.