Jump to content

Batter Interference with 2 Outs NFHS/OBR Difference?


Recommended Posts

2 outs, no count,  R1 stealing on pitch, batter leans over plate and interferes with the throw.

By NFHS 7.3.5, I've got batter the out whether the play results in an out, or not. The batter guilty of BI does not come to the plate the next inning.

However, in OBR, don't we have delayed dead ball? if the runner is called out, the batter whose interference was disregarded returns to the plate.

Seems like a rules difference that I haven't heard commented on.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 10
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It’s written clearly in the penalty for 7-3-5.  . If the pitch is a third strike and in the umpire's judgment interference prevents a possible double play (additional outs), two may be ruled out. [8-4

I recommend returning to that understanding, as it is the correct one (not because it's mine, but because all codes agree).

15 minutes ago, Vumpire said:

2 outs, no count,  R1 stealing on pitch, batter leans over plate and interferes with the throw.

By NFHS 7.3.5, I've got batter the out whether the play results in an out, or not. The batter guilty of BI does not come to the plate the next inning.

However, in OBR, don't we have delayed dead ball? if the runner is called out, the batter whose interference was disregarded returns to the plate.

Seems like a rules difference that I haven't heard commented on.

 

I think there is more evidence in the book but this phrase in your cite should suffice. But it is confusing. OBR, NCAA and FED are the same in garden variety BI. Point the infraction and see what happens.

“When an attempt to put out a runner at any other base is unsuccessful,”

Excerpt From
2020 NFHS Baseball Rules Book
NFHS
https://books.apple.com/us/book/2020-nfhs-baseball-rules-book/id1485298477
This material may be protected by copyright.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Vumpire said:

2 outs, no count,  R1 stealing on pitch, batter leans over plate and interferes with the throw.

By NFHS 7.3.5, I've got batter the out whether the play results in an out, or not. The batter guilty of BI does not come to the plate the next inning.

However, in OBR, don't we have delayed dead ball? if the runner is called out, the batter whose interference was disregarded returns to the plate.

Seems like a rules difference that I haven't heard commented on.

 

See these two cases (the specific references might have changed):

7.3.5 SITUATION A: With R1 going to third, B2 steps across home plate to hinder F2 who is fielding the
ball or throwing to third, or attempting to throw to third. RULING: If R1 is tagged out despite the
hindrance, the interference is ignored, and with less than two outs, the ball remains alive. If R1 is not
tagged out, B2 is declared out, and when there are less than two outs, the ball becomes dead
immediately and all runners must return to the bases occupied at time of the pitch.

7.3.5 SITUATION H: With no one out and R1 on third and R2 on first, R2 attempts to steal second. B3
interferes with F2. F2's throw is in time to retire R2. On the play, R1 scores. RULING: Since F2 was able
to retire R2, the interference is ignored and the ball remains alive. Therefore, R1's run counts. (7-3-5)

Link to post
Share on other sites

All codes apply the same standard: if the first throw by F2 retires a runner, then we take that as evidence of no hindrance.

No hindrance = no INT, so we disregard the batter's action and play on.

The FED rule is 7-3-5, not 7.3.5 (periods denote case plays, not rules).

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Vumpire said:

2 outs, no count,  R1 stealing on pitch, batter leans over plate and interferes with the throw.

By NFHS 7.3.5, I've got batter the out whether the play results in an out, or not. The batter guilty of BI does not come to the plate the next inning.

However, in OBR, don't we have delayed dead ball? if the runner is called out, the batter whose interference was disregarded returns to the plate.

Seems like a rules difference that I haven't heard commented on.

 

The only rule difference on batter INT in FED is, with less than two outs,  if the runner is stealing, and the batter swings and misses at strike three, the Umpire has a choice. he can call the runner out, if he thinks the catcher was denied the chance to throw out the runner. If, in the umpire's judgement, F2 had no chance of retiring the runner, even without the INT, the runner isbe sent back to his TOP base. (personally, that runner better be standing on the base he stole when the catcher receives the ball for me to send the runner back and not call him out)

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Richvee said:

The only rule difference on batter INT in FED is, with less than two outs,  if the runner is stealing, and the batter swings and misses at strike three, the Umpire has a choice. he can call the runner out, if he thinks the catcher was denied the chance to throw out the runner. If, in the umpire's judgement, F2 had no chance of retiring the runner, even without the INT, the runner isbe sent back to his TOP base. (personally, that runner better be standing on the base he stole when the catcher receives the ball for me to send the runner back and not call him out)

Can you give me a CP on this please? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, maven said:

All codes apply the same standard: if the first throw by F2 retires a runner, then we take that as evidence of no hindrance.

No hindrance = no INT, so we disregard the batter's action and play on.

The FED rule is 7-3-5, not 7.3.5 (periods denote case plays, not rules).

I have always understood it your way. But the 7-3-5 Penalty is unambiguous. With two outs, the batter is out. As soon as he interferes, inning is over, we don't care what happens on the tag.

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Vumpire said:

I have always understood it your way. But the 7-3-5 Penalty is unambiguous. With two outs, the batter is out. As soon as he interferes, inning is over, we don't care what happens on the tag.

The batter hasn't interfered if the throw and putout is successful. But the wording of 7-3-5 and 5-1-2a could be better.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tborze said:

Can you give me a CP on this please? 

It’s written clearly in the penalty for 7-3-5. 
. If the pitch is a third strike and in the umpire's judgment interference prevents a possible double play (additional outs), two may be ruled out. [8-4-2g, 8-4-2l(1)]
And there is this

7.3.5 SITUATION D: 

With R1 on first base and R2 on second base, one out and two strikes on B4, R1 and R2 attempt a double steal. B4 swings and misses the pitch and interferes with F2's attempt to throw out either R1 or R2. 

RULING: If in the umpire's judgment F2 could have made a putout on the runner(s) but cannot determine where the play was going to be made because of the nature of the interference, the umpire will then call out the runner nearest home plate, which isR2.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Vumpire said:

I have always understood it your way. 

I recommend returning to that understanding, as it is the correct one (not because it's mine, but because all codes agree).

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.






×
×
  • Create New...