New NAIA Brainshark Video

[White47]

Anyone watched the new Brainshark video on arbiter? If you haven't I'll try to explain the situation. 

Right hander in the box, with runner on first. Pitcher delivers a inside pitch that the batter has to avoid so it doesn't hit him. in doing so he get off balance and strep over the plate where he hinders the catcher with his attempt to throw out R! stealing. 

In the video the PU called interference, and on first watched I agreed. Then I watched it again and I'm not so sure. they are not publishing there official ruling until march first. Watch do y'all think?

[noumpere]

Didn't (can't) watch the video, but if the pitch *causes* the batter to move and hinder F2, that is not BI.

[catsbackr]

I watched the video and I see your point, but...

 

I guess the PU judged that the batter could have avoided the pitch and maintained his position in the batter's box.  Judgement.

[White47]

1 hour ago, catsbackr said:

I watched the video and I see your point, but...

 

I guess the PU judged that the batter could have avoided the pitch and maintained his position in the batter's box.  Judgement.

yea I'm defiantly not saying he was wrong, especially at game speed with no replay, And I'm still 60/40 ( interference)  on the situation and I've watched it several times.

[kstrunk]

7.11.f - A batter is out when:

f. The batter intentionally or unintentionally interferes with the catcher's fielding or throwing by stepping out of the batter's box OR making ANY OTHER MOVEMENT that hinders a defensive player's action at home plate;... 

I'd love to get off the hook on this one too, but not sure the rules will let us. Am I missing a note somewhere, or another rule that addresses avoiding being hit by pitch absolves a batter of interference? 

[jms1425]

I have BI. It reminds me of the obstruction call in the World Series between Boston and St Louis. Someone asked Jim Joyce after the game what the third baseman could have done in that situation to NOT obstruct the runner. Joyce shrugged and said, "I don't know... disappear?"

[White47]

25 minutes ago, jms1425 said:

I have BI. It reminds me of the obstruction call in the World Series between Boston and St Louis. Someone asked Jim Joyce after the game what the third baseman could have done in that situation to NOT obstruct the runner. Joyce shrugged and said, "I don't know... disappear?"

good point

 

1 hour ago, kstrunk said:

7.11.f - A batter is out when:

f. The batter intentionally or unintentionally interferes with the catcher's fielding or throwing by stepping out of the batter's box OR making ANY OTHER MOVEMENT that hinders a defensive player's action at home plate;... 

I'd love to get off the hook on this one too, but not sure the rules will let us. Am I missing a note somewhere, or another rule that addresses avoiding being hit by pitch absolves a batter of interference? 

I've looked and couldn't find anything.

 

2 hours ago, noumpere said:

Didn't (can't) watch the video, but if the pitch *causes* the batter to move and hinder F2, that is not BI.

beside common scene, what rule backing do we have to call it this way?? as you know, the Rule book doesn't often include common scene. 

[White47]

In the clip you just watched, which statement is most correct:

a. This is not batter's interference because the batter did not swing at the pitch and did not intentionally interfere.
b. Although the batter's actions were unintentional, the batter interfered with the catcher’s fielding or throwing by stepping out of the batter’s box.
c. Although the batter's action was unintentional, the batter interfered with the catcher’s fielding or throwing; the batter's movement(s) hindered the fielder’s ability to throw the ball to second base from home plate.
d. This is not batter's interference because the batter has the right to avoid being hit by a pitch and in this situation in order for there to be batter’s interference, the actions by the batter would have to be intentional.       here are the possible answers to the situation. based on the way the possible answers are worded i think its pretty obvious as to what they want us to call her.

[catsbackr]

This is different.

 

Joyce had a runner interference.  We're talking about a batter in the batter's box.  The pitch(er) causes the batter to have to avoid the pitch, thereby losing his balance, and if the HP umpire judges, interferes or doesn't interfere with the catcher's throw.

 

Just umpire.  I'm good either way.

[Jimurray]

18 minutes ago, catsbackr said:

This is different.

 

Joyce had a runner interference.  We're talking about a batter in the batter's box.  The pitch(er) causes the batter to have to avoid the pitch, thereby losing his balance, and if the HP umpire judges, interferes or doesn't interfere with the catcher's throw.

 

Just umpire.  I'm good either way.

What if the pitch caused the batter to lean over the plate to try and hit it?

[grayhawk]

3 hours ago, White47 said:

In the clip you just watched, which statement is most correct:

a. This is not batter's interference because the batter did not swing at the pitch and did not intentionally interfere.
b. Although the batter's actions were unintentional, the batter interfered with the catcher’s fielding or throwing by stepping out of the batter’s box.
c. Although the batter's action was unintentional, the batter interfered with the catcher’s fielding or throwing; the batter's movement(s) hindered the fielder’s ability to throw the ball to second base from home plate.
d. This is not batter's interference because the batter has the right to avoid being hit by a pitch and in this situation in order for there to be batter’s interference, the actions by the batter would have to be intentional.       here are the possible answers to the situation. based on the way the possible answers are worded i think its pretty obvious as to what they want us to call her.

I answered D knowing full well that the correct answer is C.  This was a pitch down and in and was right at the batter's feet.  He did a little hop in an attempt to avoid being hit which caused him to step forward to gain his balance.  How can we expect batters to avoid being hit by a pitch when they have an opportunity to do so, and then penalize them for doing just that?  In most cases, the catcher will be blocking the pitch to prevent a passed ball and there would be no play in the stealing R1.  This catcher happened to pick it and come up throwing.

Do I fault PU for calling BI here?  Absolutely not.  He saw a batter step out of the box and hinder the catcher.  Baseball is often an inherently unfair game, so perhaps we just chalk it up to that and tell the batter that he was merely a victim of circumstance.

[catsbackr]

2 different things. 

 

1 is choosing to lean outside to hit a pitch.  The other is moving to avoid being hit by the ball.  1 is making a choice.  The other is reacting.

 

But, like I said, just umpire, make the call, I'm good either way.

[Senor Azul]

The NAIA plays using the NCAA rules with just a few modifications—here are a couple things to consider before penalizing the batter in this scenario. The following rules are from the 2017-18 NCAA rule book (the relevant parts have been bolded by me):

NCAA 7-1-d. Batter’s-Box Rule. This rule is designed to speed up play by controlling the actions of the batter between pitches. 1) The batter must keep at least one foot in the batter’s box throughout the time at bat.

Exceptions—A batter may leave the batter’s box but not the dirt area surrounding home plate when:

a) The batter swings at a pitch.

b) The batter is forced off balance or out of the box by the pitch.

NCAA 8-2-d. When hit by a pitched ball at which the individual is not attempting to strike, the ball is immediately dead; 1) A batter may not make a movement to intentionally get hit by the pitch and must avoid being hit whenever possible…

[grayhawk]

1 hour ago, Senor Azul said:

The NAIA plays using the NCAA rules with just a few modifications—here are a couple things to consider before penalizing the batter in this scenario. The following rules are from the 2017-18 NCAA rule book (the relevant parts have been bolded by me):

NCAA 7-1-d. Batter’s-Box Rule. This rule is designed to speed up play by controlling the actions of the batter between pitches. 1) The batter must keep at least one foot in the batter’s box throughout the time at bat.

Exceptions—A batter may leave the batter’s box but not the dirt area surrounding home plate when:

a) The batter swings at a pitch.

b) The batter is forced off balance or out of the box by the pitch.

NCAA 8-2-d. When hit by a pitched ball at which the individual is not attempting to strike, the ball is immediately dead; 1) A batter may not make a movement to intentionally get hit by the pitch and must avoid being hit whenever possible…

Hmm, interesting application of this rule.  This is a rule meant to keep batters in the box to keep play moving, not to prevent a batter from interfering with the catcher.  But if the batter is allowed to leave the box because the pitch forced him to, then why wouldn't this extend to the BI rule?  I like your thought process here.

[kstrunk]

While I like your thinking too, I'm guessing when they give the answer on 3/1, that thinking won't apply. But I'll rejoice if it does! 

[johnnyg08]

16 hours ago, Senor Azul said:

The NAIA plays using the NCAA rules with just a few modifications—here are a couple things to consider before penalizing the batter in this scenario. The following rules are from the 2017-18 NCAA rule book (the relevant parts have been bolded by me):

NCAA 7-1-d. Batter’s-Box Rule. This rule is designed to speed up play by controlling the actions of the batter between pitches. 1) The batter must keep at least one foot in the batter’s box throughout the time at bat.

Exceptions—A batter may leave the batter’s box but not the dirt area surrounding home plate when:

a) The batter swings at a pitch.

b) The batter is forced off balance or out of the box by the pitch.

NCAA 8-2-d. When hit by a pitched ball at which the individual is not attempting to strike, the ball is immediately dead; 1) A batter may not make a movement to intentionally get hit by the pitch and must avoid being hit whenever possible…

True, but did he hinder F2 or not? Batter didn't have to fall forward either. He could have stepped back. (I haven't seen the video) Keep it simple. 

There a lot more rule support for grabbing the BI than not. How can we get the video clip?

[grayhawk]

2 hours ago, johnnyg08 said:

True, but did he hinder F2 or not? Batter didn't have to fall forward either. He could have stepped back. (I haven't seen the video) Keep it simple. 

There a lot more rule support for grabbing the BI than not. How can we get the video clip?

He definitely hindered F2.  LH pitcher and RH batter.  The pitch came in on his back foot and he did a little hop to avoid being hit.  He had to take a step forward to regain his balance.  This all happened in an instant - pure reaction.

[grayhawk]

IMG_4902.MOV

[spiffdawg7]

NCAA released the answer saying there is no exception for avoiding the pitch in the Batter's Interference rule.  The NCAA wants BI called even in this video. 

[noumpere]

11 minutes ago, spiffdawg7 said:

NCAA released the answer saying there is no exception for avoiding the pitch in the Batter's Interference rule.  The NCAA wants BI called even in this video. 

Thanks.  That's new (and wrong -- but they don't ask me)

[Jimurray]

3 minutes ago, noumpere said:

Thanks.  That's new (and wrong -- but they don't ask me)

Where would we find the old exception?

[noumpere]

2 hours ago, Jimurray said:

Where would we find the old exception?

In my notes from some NCAA regional meeting several years ago. 

[jms1425]

Full answer from NCAA:

"Rule 7-11-f states “A batter is out when the batter intentionally or unintentionally interferes with the catcher’s fielding or throwing by stepping out of the batter’s box or making any other movement that hinders a defensive player’s action at home plate.” 

Even though the interference was unintentional, the batter is out for interfering with the catcher’s fielding or throwing.  There is no exception listed for trying to avoid a pitch and it was not the catcher’s fault that the batter chose to jump forward and step out of the batter’s box to try to avoid being hit.  Unfortunate and unintentional, but the batter is out unless the runner is retired."

[johnnyg08]

On 3/1/2018 at 10:29 AM, spiffdawg7 said:

NCAA released the answer saying there is no exception for avoiding the pitch in the Batter's Interference rule.  The NCAA wants BI called even in this video. 

I have no problem with that. It makes it easier for us. Easier is better. 

[johnnyg08]