Inadvertent contact with ball outside batter's box

[Guest Scott]

First base is empty.  The batter swings and misses for strike three.  The catcher misplays the ball and it bounces off the catcher into fair territory.  The batter takes off for first.  The batter clearly makes incidental contact with the baseball outside of the box and in fair territory.

The home plate umpire calls interference and calls the batter out.  The umpire explains that if the batter comes into contact with the ball in fair territory he is automatically out.  The coach for the batter argues that the ball "is not a batted ball" and that incidental contact, so long as not intentional, should be allowed.  The coach argues it is the same as if a catcher throws to a base and his the base runner.  The base runner is not out if the baserunner did not intentionally try to interfere with the throw.

So my question is this:  On a third strike that the catcher misplays and the ball goes into fair territory, is the batter out if the batter makes incidental, unintentional contact with the ball?  Stressing the point that the ball is not a batted ball.

[Biscuit]

The coach is right. As long as it's not a batted ball, and it's not intentional, it's nothing. Play on. 

 

Edit: this is correct for FED, sometimes for OBR see @maven's reaponse

[maven]

14 minutes ago, Guest Scott said:

So my question is this:  On a third strike that the catcher misplays and the ball goes into fair territory, is the batter out if the batter makes incidental, unintentional contact with the ball?  Stressing the point that the ball is not a batted ball.

The coach is right about the umpire's stated rationale: mere contact in fair territory is INT only for a batted ball, not for D3K. And we should all strive to stop thinking of any out as "automatic." Different provisions have different conditions of application.

The answer to the question will depend on the code:

• for FED, contact must be intentional to be ruled INT (8-3-1a); it sounds as if this play should have been a no-call if the game was played under FED rules
• for pro rules, contact with the ball that clearly hinders the play of the catcher should be ruled INT. 6.01(a)(1) The OP does not indicate whether the contact hindered F2's play, so we don't know whether the umpire (accidentally? incidentally?) correctly ruled the BR out.

[LRZ]

In OBR, what does "clearly" add to "hinders"? Does the adjective add anything to an umpire's judgment? Are there degrees of hindrance? I ask seriously, not to make a tacit point.

[The Man in Blue]

It makes it clearer.  Clearly.  

 

 

[noumpere]

22 minutes ago, LRZ said:

In OBR, what does "clearly" add to "hinders"? Does the adjective add anything to an umpire's judgment? Are there degrees of hindrance? I ask seriously, not to make a tacit point.

I interpret it as "benefit of the doubt to the batter" -- the closer the contact is to home and the less the ball is changed from it's otherwise path, the less the chance for INT.

[Senor Azul]

From the 2013 Wendelstedt manual (section 9.3.4, p. 178):

When the batter-runner contacts an uncaught third strike, or hinders the catcher in his attempt to field the ball, the umpire will wait to see whether it has an interfering effect on the play. If the play is clearly interfered with, the umpire will call and signal interference and then call time. He will call out the batter-runner and return all other runners to their original bases.

If the ball is barely affected, there may be no interference, however, if the ball is knocked a considerable distance away, interference is likely. It no longer makes any difference whether the interference was avoidable. All that matters is whether interference clearly occurred. There is no “both players doing their job” exception as with batted balls out front of the plate.

R2, no outs, 2-2 count. The batter swings and misses the next pitch in the dirt. The catcher blocks the ball and it is deflected out in front of the plate. As the BR starts out of the box towards first base, (a) the ball accidentally glances off of him and rolls a couple feet away. The catcher picks up the ball and throws into right field. R2 scores and the BR ends up at second base. (b) the ball is accidentally kicked towards the dugout. The catcher chases after the ball, however, cannot make a play. R2 advances to third, and the BR reaches first base safely.

Ruling:  The umpire should wait and see whether the batter’s actions interfered with the catcher making a play. In (a), he should then signal that it’s nothing when the catcher is able to make the play. The play stands. In (b), he should then signal interference and then call time when the catcher cannot make the play. The BR is out, and R2 returns to second base.

[Senor Azul]

Forgot to add this important point from the 2018 Minor League Baseball Umpire Manual (section 6.3, p. 82) concerning batter interference after a third strike not caught: 

NOTE:  It does not matter if the batter-runner is in the vicinity of home plate or up the first baseline when the infraction occurs. The location of the batter-runner is not relevant.