Batter runner interference or obstruction commited by the catcher on the batter runner

[Guest Mike]

Alright here's the situation, runners on first and second with no outs and a left handed batter bunts the ball in fair territory within 5 feet of home plate. The catcher immediately goes for the ball and in doing so trips/knocks the batter runner to the ground. Catcher then picks up ball and tags the batter runner and then throws the ball to third base and they successfully tag out the runner who came from second base. What is the correct call to make in this situation? 

[noumpere]

The correct call sounds ;like "out" "out" to me. A tangle / untangle in the immediate vicinity of the pate is generally "nothing."

 

Here's the OBR rule:

 

Rule 6.01(a )(10) Comment (Rule 7.09( j) Comment )

: When a

catcher and batter-runner going to first base have contact when

the catcher is fielding the ball, there is generally no violation

and nothing should be called. “Obstruction” by a fielder

attempting to field a ball should be called only in very flagrant

and violent cases because the rules give him the right of way,

but of course such “right of way” is not a license to, for exam-

ple, intentionally trip a runner even though fielding the ball. If

the catcher is fielding the ball and any fielder, including the

pitcher, obstructs a runner going to first base, “obstruction”

shall be called and the base runner awarded first base.

[maven]

This is one of the rare situations where "just doing what he was supposed to do" excuses contact between fielder and runner. Provided F2 did nothing but go for the ball — didn't push or otherwise intentionally contact the runner (and it is up to the umpire to judge that) — the contact and its results are legal. Same in all codes (OBR just above).

Our ordinary mechanic in cases of legal contact is to signal "safe" and verbalize "That's nothing!" But with the ball so near to the BR and a potential out imminent, I'd recommend skipping the signal: it will look odd to see a safe signal followed almost immediately by an out signal. Verbalize "that's nothing" on the contact, then rule on the tag.

[The Flush]

It is hard to imagine this happening to a lefty.

[maven]

36 minutes ago, The Flush said:

It is hard to imagine this happening to a lefty.

Imagine a batter who's slow getting out of the box (might think it's foul) and a nubber hit a few feet fair from the 1BL and 5' down the line.

[ALStripes17]

Imagine a batter who's slow getting out of the box (might think it's foul) and a nubber hit a few feet fair from the 1BL and 5' down the line.

But at that point, the batter thinking it was foul and remaining near the box is not 'doing what he was supposed to be doing' and that's running to 1B. I know we can speculate the OP as far as we want but thinking it's foul does not excuse him.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[Rich Ives]

1 hour ago, ALStripes17 said:

But at that point, the batter thinking it was foul and remaining near the box is not 'doing what he was supposed to be doing' and that's running to 1B. 

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Run to first on a foul ball is what he's supposed to do? This isn't Calvin ball.

[maven]

1 hour ago, ALStripes17 said:

But at that point, the batter thinking it was foul and remaining near the box is not 'doing what he was supposed to be doing' and that's running to 1B.

I'm not envisioning a B standing there: he reads it and moves just as fast as F2. That's why they (legally) collide and tangle/untangle. The question was how this could happen to a LHB.

[ALStripes17]

Run to first on a foul ball is what he's supposed to do? This isn't Calvin ball.

Might think it's foul? Not the same as 'is foul'

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[ALStripes17]

I'm not envisioning a B standing there: he reads it and moves just as fast as F2. That's why they (legally) collide and tangle/untangle. The question was how this could happen to a LHB.

Understood. I just disagreed that the B standing there bc he thought it was foul was not an excuse. Maybe if he's finishing his swing and is slow to start to 1B or stumbles as he turns to 1B sure. But yes, I agree it's definitely possible for this to happen to a LHB as asked previously.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[Rich Ives]

25 minutes ago, ALStripes17 said:

Might think it's foul? Not the same as 'is foul'

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Play much? Seems like a normal reaction to me.

 

[ALStripes17]

Play much? Seems like a normal reaction to me.

 

Pretty condescending question when this link does give evidence for my position http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/6479266/v32120611/pitcin-cueto-bunts-out-on-batter-interference

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[Richvee]

6 hours ago, ALStripes17 said:

Pretty condescending question when this link does give evidence for my position http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/6479266/v32120611/pitcin-cueto-bunts-out-on-batter-interference

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Warning: you might want to mute the announcers. 

[Stk004]

On Thursday, July 14, 2016 at 3:12 PM, Richvee said:

Warning: you might want to mute the announcers. 

First of all . I should've listened. Second of all, what's the justification for the call here? 

[Richvee]

41 minutes ago, Stk004 said:

First of all . I should've listened. Second of all, what's the justification for the call here? 

Since the batter runner did not attempt to run to 1st, he's guilty of interfering with F2's attempt to field the ball. Had he ran out of the box, then we have the tangle/untangle situation. (Barring any intentional interference/obstruction by the runner or fielder)