Batter's Interference Part II

[mstaylor]

The other day I was observing umpires and I saw a classic BI on a steal of third. The catcher comes up to throw but pulled it down when the batter backed into his way.

I talked to the umpire after the game and he said he didn't think it was because the catcher pulled it down and didn't throw. When I explained that it was BI even it was only an attempt, he said the batter was still in the box. I also explained that even if he is in the box, it is possible for him to interfere.

The point of my post is to make sure guys are getting this call when it happens. It is passed on many times for different reasons. Sometimes because they don't want to make waves, horrible reason. Sometimes they genuinely don't understand what is and isn't BI, not good but understandable. They need to make sure they are getting to clinics to fix this problem. Sometimes they reconize it but aren't sure how to enforce it so they pass. Another horrible reason to pass on a call. Either get together with your partner to figure it out or get in the damn rulebook and learn on your own.

BI, obstruction, interference and balks are all rules that we should be learning and calling. Never pass on any call to make your life easy. These are rules that put one side or the other at a disadvantage and needs to be called to fix the problem. Will this make us unpopular sometimes, sure, but who cares.

[Bob Bainter]

I agree with Mr. Taylor about not being afraid to make that call on the catcher not throwing. It's a tough call to make, but you have to be firm about your decision...let me throw you a scenario that occurred to me that changed my mind on this...

AAA game in the IL...R1 stealing second, catcher comes up to throw and the batter steps across the plate, and realizes he's in trouble. The catcher would have thrown the ball right off his helmet if he lets it go, and immediately double-clutches it and turns and looks at me. I called interference, and got the old "He's got to throw it, doesn't he?" argument. Now, of course, we all know the rule doesn't mention making an actual throw...so my "argument" back to the manager was, "If he lets that throw go, he puts it in one earhole, and it comes out the other. He just saved your guy from a ringing in his ears..." Now, granted, I had some experience and (I hope) some respect from the manager, and he understood.

I will say, however, that there are times that the catcher makes it difficult on us when he doesn't make a play. It can be simliar to the runner's lane towards first...it does make it easier to call when the catcher throws it...but that doesn't necessarily make it the "right" call to ignore it...but that's a TOTALLY NEW TOPIC...and I don't want to get into that...lol...

Use your head, think about the situation, and make the correct call.

Bob Bainter

[Tyennie]

So what are your thoughts on this one? This has always been a concern of mine.

We have a coach that will send his catcher up the 3B line with R2 and a clean single. My perspective is he wants his catcher to slow down R2 advancing around 3rd. Isn't this impeding? which is obstruction. The throw did not take him 12 feet up the line, F2 just moves there and waits. Usually R2 will see the catcher and head back to 3rd. But again I see this as obs. no where in the definition does it say physical contact must be made. what say ye oh learned men in blue. ty

[Umpire in Chief]

In this situation until the catchers actions actually cause a problem with the runner I've got nothing. The catcher would need to be in close proximity and cause the runner to do more than just run a bit up the line. We don't need contact but I'm going to need more than just the runner holding up a bit. He's going to have to convince me that some obstruction occurred more than him just standing there especially only 12 feet up the line.

[BT_Blue]

I used to work a HS in the Burbank area (north of LA where all the movie studios are at... yes the are in Burbank, not Hollywood) that the coach would teach his catcher to try and draw a BI by intentionally moving ever so slightly into the batter. It was a good trick but we all knew about it. The problem comes that with this little trick of theirs it probably cost them actual BI because we knew they tried to draw the BI instead of it actually happening.

[NWA_UMP]

While I was a coach, I taught my catcher to make the throw even if the runner was close to the bag, especially third....if the batter was one that liked to drift out of the box after every pitch. Same thing on a sac bunt to move the runner up...if the catch saw the batter hang over the plate...make the call obvious.