Interference on play at Plate

[tiger79]

Runner on 3B with no outs. Pitch is in the dirt, catcher blocks it and the ball rolls behind the batter who, in my opinion, inadvertently kicks the ball away as he backs out of the box thinking the runner may score on the PB. The ball was kicked back towards the dugout and the runner scored. What should have been the call? The run was allowed.

[JaxRolo]

Good Call! It was not intentional.

[BigUmpire]

Sorry Chief.

At best- reset to TOP.

Better is interference call. 

[DVA7130]

This might be 7.09C

[grayhawk]

This might be 7.09C

 

I agree.  Not only did he hinder the play, but it sounds like the batter actually created the scoring opportunity.  From the description, R3 wasn't going to advance until after the batter kicked the ball away.  Sucks for the offense for R3 to be called out for the batter's interference, but allowing the run to score is a bigger injustice.

 

Yes, I know that the defense screwed up by throwing the pitch into the dirt, but F2 did his job blocking it and keeping R3 from scoring until the batter kicked the ball, albeit inadvertently.

 

The fairest outcome would be to simply send R3 back to third, but I'm not sure there is a basis in the rules for that unless 9.01© is used.

[Replacematt]

The fairest outcome would be to simply send R3 back to third, but I'm not sure there is a basis in the rules for that unless 9.01© is used.

 

And that isn't an option, because it was either batter inteference or it wasn't, and batter interference is a point covered in the rulebook.

[goody14]

Call it interference without a play like what happens on backswing interference (in OBR at least).

 

Probably not correct by letter of law but a coach would not know the difference

[JaxRolo]

Sorry Chief.

At best- reset to TOP.

Better is interference call. 

What! Are blind??? You are horrible!!! WTF are you looking at? That's the 3rd call you have missed!!! Go back to t-ball! You don't belong here!!

 

 

 

Sorry - Just trying to see what it feels like to be a coach.

[grayhawk]

 

The fairest outcome would be to simply send R3 back to third, but I'm not sure there is a basis in the rules for that unless 9.01© is used.

 

And that isn't an option, because it was either batter inteference or it wasn't, and batter interference is a point covered in the rulebook.

 

 

I agree, for the most part.  I think it could be argued that there was no play at the plate because R3 didn't advance until after the ball was kicked.  I know it's thin - just thinking out loud.

[BigUmpire]

 

Sorry Chief.

At best- reset to TOP.

Better is interference call. 

What! Are blind??? You are horrible!!! WTF are you looking at? That's the 3rd call you have missed!!! Go back to t-ball! You don't belong here!!

 

 

 

Sorry - Just trying to see what it feels like to be a coach

[MadMax]

What if we, the umpire, had stepped on it, or in our shuffle to get out of the way of F2's movements kicked the ball away (What was that I just kicked? Ohhh... there goes the ball...)? Umpire interference. Unintentional, of course, but you call it as this and make it right / make it fair.

 

So too with this. The offense gained an advantage over an unintentional action upon the ball by one of their players (the batter). I've witnessed it where an on-deck hitter, trying to be helpful, picked up a ball that rolled over to him, thinking that it was fouled off... not realizing that it was actually a live ball. Can't call him out for it, but any base-runners go back to where they were TOP.

[Jocko]

I agree with @Matt. BI covers this. It's either BI or nothing.

[Replacematt]

What if we, the umpire, had stepped on it, or in our shuffle to get out of the way of F2's movements kicked the ball away (What was that I just kicked? Ohhh... there goes the ball...)? Umpire interference. Unintentional, of course, but you call it as this and make it right / make it fair.

 

No, you don't.

[BRUMP]

What if we, the umpire, had stepped on it, or in our shuffle to get out of the way of F2's movements kicked the ball away (What was that I just kicked? Ohhh... there goes the ball...)? Umpire interference. Unintentional, of course, but you call it as this and make it right / make it fair.

There are only 2 scenarios where UI is called. This is neither of the 2.

[MadMax]

 

What if we, the umpire, had stepped on it, or in our shuffle to get out of the way of F2's movements kicked the ball away (What was that I just kicked? Ohhh... there goes the ball...)? Umpire interference. Unintentional, of course, but you call it as this and make it right / make it fair.

 

No, you don't.

 

 

So if you trip up the catcher, or if you step on / smother a live ball behind the plate, or if some freak bounce results in the ball ending up in your ball bag, you're _not_ calling Umpire Interference? You're just saying "tough luck, kid, I'm just part of the field. Play on." ?

 

 

 

What if we, the umpire, had stepped on it, or in our shuffle to get out of the way of F2's movements kicked the ball away (What was that I just kicked? Ohhh... there goes the ball...)? Umpire interference. Unintentional, of course, but you call it as this and make it right / make it fair.

There are only 2 scenarios where UI is called. This is neither of the 2.

 

 

Right right, @BRUMP, Rules 2.00c and 5.09b/f. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and ask... When you state "This is neither of the 2", what are you linking "this" to? The OP, or my proposed scenario?

 

If "this" = OP, then of _course_ it's not applicable... I'm not going to be that blatantly foolish to apply Umpire Interference to a situation where the batter does the kicking.

If "this" = the scenario I described, then see what I replied to @Matt.

[Replacematt]

 

 

What if we, the umpire, had stepped on it, or in our shuffle to get out of the way of F2's movements kicked the ball away (What was that I just kicked? Ohhh... there goes the ball...)? Umpire interference. Unintentional, of course, but you call it as this and make it right / make it fair.

 

No, you don't.

 

 

So if you trip up the catcher, or if you step on / smother a live ball behind the plate, or if some freak bounce results in the ball ending up in your ball bag, you're _not_ calling Umpire Interference? You're just saying "tough luck, kid, I'm just part of the field. Play on." ?

 

Exactly, except for the ball bag situation, which is covered under lodged ball in umpire equipment.

[LRZ]

When does 6.06© apply instead of 7.09©? Am I misreading something?

[grayhawk]

When does 6.06© apply instead of 7.09©? Am I misreading something?

 

6.06© applies with 2 outs.

 

It's kind of a double penalty - run doesn't score and batter can't lead off the next inning.

[Replacematt]

When does 6.06© apply instead of 7.09©? Am I misreading something?

 

6.06c always applies; 7.09c applies in situations where R3 is attempting to score. Think of 7.09c as being a explanatory rule for those situations.

[LRZ]

6.06© reads, in part, "A batter is out for illegal action when...[h]e interferes with the catcher's fielding or throwing by...making any...movement that hinders the catcher's play at home base." So 6.06© does apply to situations where a runner is attempting to score, i.e., the catcher is trying to make a play on that runner coming home.

 

The comment implies that 6.06© is not limited to two outs, as the batter is out, the ball dead, and "No runner may advance...and all runners must return to the last base that was...legally touched at the time of the interference." If the rule only applied to two out situations, then the batter would be out #3, and there would be no meaning to putting runners back.

 

If the batter kicking the ball (however inadvertently) is interference (hinders the catcher from retrieving it and thus making the play) under 6.06©, then can we achieve the "fair" result (post #5): call the batter out and send R3 back to third?

 

Or are there official interpretations that limit the applicability of either or both of these rules?

[Replacematt]

6.06© reads, in part, "A batter is out for illegal action when...[h]e interferes with the catcher's fielding or throwing by...making any...movement that hinders the catcher's play at home base." So 6.06© does apply to situations where a runner is attempting to score, i.e., the catcher is trying to make a play on that runner coming home.

 

The comment implies that 6.06© is not limited to two outs, as the batter is out, the ball dead, and "No runner may advance...and all runners must return to the last base that was...legally touched at the time of the interference." If the rule only applied to two out situations, then the batter would be out #3, and there would be no meaning to putting runners back.

 

If the batter kicking the ball (however inadvertently) is interference (hinders the catcher from retrieving it and thus making the play) under 6.06©, then can we achieve the "fair" result (post #5): call the batter out and send R3 back to third?

 

Or are there official interpretations that limit the applicability of either or both of these rules?

 

6.06c covers all BI (and isn't written the most clearly.) So, it covers a batter interfering whenever a runner is attempting to advance. The trick is to pull out the relevant portions that apply to a given situation. So, the way to think of it is to apply 6.06c unless the situation in 7.09c is present (R3 attempting to score with fewer than two out.) 

 

You've figured out the salient issue...here's what I would posit: BI is (more or less) intent-neutral. So, if we had an identical play where the batter intentionally kicks the ball away from F2 to give R3 the opportunity to advance, what would be the penalty?

[grayhawk]

The comment implies that 6.06© is not limited to two outs, as the batter is out, the ball dead, and "No runner may advance...and all runners must return to the last base that was...legally touched at the time of the interference." If the rule only applied to two out situations, then the batter would be out #3, and there would be no meaning to putting runners back.

 

If the batter kicking the ball (however inadvertently) is interference (hinders the catcher from retrieving it and thus making the play) under 6.06©, then can we achieve the "fair" result (post #5): call the batter out and send R3 back to third?

 

6.06© is more encompassing, providing language for multiple ways the batter can interfere.  However, in the case where the batter interferes with a catcher's play at home, the batter is out and runners return EXCEPT in the case where there are less than two outs.  In that case, refer to 7.09© which puts the runner out.  You must include the exception for a full application of the rule:

 

"EXCEPTION: Batter is not out if any runner attempting to advance is put out, or if runner trying to score is called out for batter’s interference."

 

In this case, since there were no outs and the batter interfering with the catcher's play at home, 7.09© is the appropriate rule.  The number of outs determines which rule you use and which penalty to apply.

[Jocko]

What if we, the umpire, had stepped on it, or in our shuffle to get out of the way of F2's movements kicked the ball away (What was that I just kicked? Ohhh... there goes the ball...)? Umpire interference. Unintentional, of course, but you call it as this and make it right / make it fair.

So too with this. The offense gained an advantage over an unintentional action upon the ball by one of their players (the batter). I've witnessed it where an on-deck hitter, trying to be helpful, picked up a ball that rolled over to him, thinking that it was fouled off... not realizing that it was actually a live ball. Can't call him out for it, but any base-runners go back to where they were TOP.

where to begin.....

The battery mishandled the ball. If it hits my cp and bounces far enough away for R3 to score, have I interfered? No. Same with an inadvertent kick by HP. It's a big fat nothing.

I don't understand your not grasping that intent matters exactly zero for BI. BI can occur by either action or inaction on the batter's part. The OP is TEXTBOOK BI.

On deck batter picks up a live ball? INT ALL DAY LONG. You may or may not send runners back and call a do-over. Personally, I'm getting a out. I would cite the rule for you, but I'd rather teach a man to fish. Look in the section covering people authorized to be on the field. This is covered.

[Magic]

Runner on 3B with no outs. Pitch is in the dirt, catcher blocks it and the ball rolls behind the batter who, in my opinion, inadvertently kicks the ball away as he backs out of the box thinking the runner may score on the PB. The ball was kicked back towards the dugout and the runner scored. What should have been the call? The run was allowed.

 

I need some help with this. How did he  inadvertently kick the ball as he was backing up? If the ball hit the back of his heel and rolled away as he was backing up, I am not calling  BI. If he kicks the ball with his front,  then I Am calling BI. And my 2nd question is, are you a parent watching the game? Were you the umpire who made the call in the game? Were you a coach in the game?

 

The reason I ask the questions are simple. 

 

If you were a parent? Then you really don't know what the umpire saw or ruled on. your kid also might have been the Catcher or the Pitcher. And your view of the play might be skewed. 

 

If you were the umpire? Then when you say kick, that means you determined it to be a kick, and BI would hold water.

 

If you were a Coach? Then did the Umpire use the word kick? Or was this your interpretation of the play. If it was your interpretation then, we can not say for sure we had a kick.

[Jocko]

Runner on 3B with no outs. Pitch is in the dirt, catcher blocks it and the ball rolls behind the batter who, in my opinion, inadvertently kicks the ball away as he backs out of the box thinking the runner may score on the PB. The ball was kicked back towards the dugout and the runner scored. What should have been the call? The run was allowed.

 

I need some help with this. How did he  inadvertently kick the ball as he was backing up? If the ball hit the back of his heel and rolled away as he was backing up, I am not calling  BI.

 . how is this relevant? Any act means ANY act.

[Magic]

 

 

Runner on 3B with no outs. Pitch is in the dirt, catcher blocks it and the ball rolls behind the batter who, in my opinion, inadvertently kicks the ball away as he backs out of the box thinking the runner may score on the PB. The ball was kicked back towards the dugout and the runner scored. What should have been the call? The run was allowed.

 

I need some help with this. How did he  inadvertently kick the ball as he was backing up? If the ball hit the back of his heel and rolled away as he was backing up, I am not calling  BI.

 .

how is this relevant? Any act means ANY act

 

 

 

Ball hits foot or foot hits ball. HUGE difference right?