Visual Interference

[JonnyCat]

Question about "visual" interference. I was at another clinic this weekend and the topic came up one evening over adult beverages. We were talking LL rules. Some umpires that do a bit of softball brought up the age old argument of a baseball batter wagging the bat while squaring to bunt is some sort of interference. Many of us have seen it, kid squares to bunt and wags the bat before the pitch is thrown, then pulls it back when the pitch comes in.

These guys insist that it is some sort of INT. I said no, it is not. Nothing in any rulebook I've seen classifies this as INT. One umpire said it was "visual" INT, and therefore against the rules. I had never heard of "visual" INT, so I wasn't convinced.

Lo and behold, the BRD mentions visual INT under section 268 Interference: Definition. "FED: Interference is any act (physical [including visual] or verbal) that impedes, hinders, or confuses the defense." "OBR same as FED but without verbal." (LL is very close to OBR)

In reading the sections in the BRD following 268, I don't find any examples of visual INT. Perhaps Carl Childress added that verbiage on his own? In section 267, Childress talks about batter INT with a catcher trying to throw out a runner. He says: "Merely blocking the catchers vision to second base may very possibly be interference."

Can anyone offer some input into "visual" INT? What would be some examples? I can't imagine bat wagging falling into visual INT category. Any case plays or IR's that you know of?

Any input would be greatly appreciated. I don't want to lose a bet to a softball guy! 

[Velho]

We discussed this specifically recently here and no case plays came up.

LL RIM 2021 excerpt below. Section (d) is an example of visual interference (though not explicitly called that).

No more a leap than other interps we've seen to extend this is the the batter doing the baton twirling routine. It likely hasn't happened in a prominent enough situation to be addressed one way or the other (LLWS ending play for example). At higher levels it's probably less impactful on the catcher and/or addressed by the catcher/pitcher in other ways.

[Velho]

[Senor Azul]

Mr. JonnyCat, the BRD does, indeed, give examples of visual interference except they are shown in the section titled Obstruction:  Visual:  Defensive and is in section 376 of the 2016 BRD. Also, here are a couple of examples found in another interpretations manual--

From the 2021 Minor League Baseball Umpire Manual (section 6.22, pp. 114-115):  Runner on third base, one out. Batter hits a fly ball to right-center field and the runner goes back to third base to tag up. Third baseman approaches the runner, faces him, and jockeys back and forth, intentionally trying to block the runner’s view of the fielder catching the ball. Ruling:  This is obstruction under Official Baseball Rule 6.01(h)(2). The umpire should call the infraction when it occurs and award bases, if any, in the appropriate manner.

With a runner on first base, the first baseman—rather than holding the runner in the traditional manner—jockeys back and forth in front of the runner, several feet to the second base side of the bag. In the umpire’s judgment the first baseman is doing this intentionally to block the runner’s view of the pitcher. Ruling:  While Official Baseball Rule 5.02(c) allows a fielder to position himself anywhere in fair territory, if the umpire deems the fielder’s actions are a deliberate effort to block the runner’s view of the pitcher, it is illegal and clearly not within the spirit of the rules. The first baseman should be warned to stop, and if he persists, he is subject to ejection.

[maven]

Wagging the bat over the plate—during a bunt, feinted bunt, or at any other time—is nothing, ever, at any level of baseball.

[JonnyCat]

2 hours ago, maven said:

Wagging the bat over the plate—during a bunt, feinted bunt, or at any other time—is nothing, ever, at any level of baseball.

Yes, I agree and have always ruled this way. I was mainly interested in what was considered visual interference, particularly in the term "visual." I was aware of the rules SenorAzul posted above, but never equated it to "visual" INT. Now I know.

Luckily, I don't think I've ever seen it on the big diamond games I have worked, and certainly never in HS. Seems to be more of a LL thing than anything else. I think it's mostly Jacka$$ coaches teaching their players dumb things.

[BLWizzRanger]

Would a runner, who is waiting for a ground ball to pass them, be accused of visual interference if they dance or pause or do something to cause the fielder to lose sight of the ball?  We see all of the time a runner pausing so that a ground ball doesn't hit them, but, what if they let the ball go through their legs purposefully to try and cause confusion to the fielder?

This would never happen, of course....

[noumpere]

8 hours ago, BLWizzRanger said:

Would a runner, who is waiting for a ground ball to pass them, be accused of visual interference if they dance or pause or do something to cause the fielder to lose sight of the ball?  We see all of the time a runner pausing so that a ground ball doesn't hit them, but, what if they let the ball go through their legs purposefully to try and cause confusion to the fielder?

This would never happen, of course....

Yes -- that could be INT (there's some judgment involved as to what the runner is really doing).

[maven]

When a poster asks a direct question—is THIS act "visual INT"—let's be clear what the answer is before we dive into a conceptual exploration. 

Yes, the rules conceive of hindrance broadly enough that some kinds of "visual" INT/OBS are possible. But we don't want to expand that possibility so that an eager newer umpire or coach could stretch it to cover a bunt.

[Velho]

2 hours ago, maven said:

When a poster asks a direct question—is THIS act "visual INT"—let's be clear what the answer is before we dive into a conceptual exploration. 

What exactly about this sequence of events do you have an issue with?

21 hours ago, JonnyCat said:

Can anyone offer some input into "visual" INT? What would be some examples? I can't imagine bat wagging falling into visual INT category. Any case plays or IR's that you know of?

 

20 hours ago, Velho said:

We discussed this specifically recently here and no case plays came up.

LL RIM 2021 excerpt below. Section (d) is an example of visual interference (though not explicitly called that)

 

18 hours ago, Senor Azul said:

Mr. JonnyCat, the BRD does, indeed, give examples of visual interference except they are shown in the section titled Obstruction:  Visual:  Defensive and is in section 376 of the 2016 BRD

[maven]

The question went from "is this visual INT," to "what even is visual INT, and is it a thing," to "yes, visual INT is a thing, here are some rules."

Nobody circled back to the question asked, which leaves open a naive response in the affirmative.