What happens to the Count on the batter

[calablue]

OBR. I see under the penalty for runner interference on an infield fly rule where the ball is caught in foul territory that the runner is out and the batter returns to the plate.  My question is what happens to the batters count? Is it a foul ball/strike or a No Pitch. OBR only please. Thanks. I’ve never had this actually happen in a game I’ve worked. 

[Senor Azul]

From the 2021 Minor League Baseball Umpire Manual (section 6.11, p. 101):

If runner interference is called during an infield fly, the ball remains alive until it is determined whether the ball is fair or foul...If foul, even if caught, the runner is out and the batter returns to bat...

The batter returns to bat counting the foul ball.

In other words the pitch counts according to the MiLBUM. Bonus bit of information--if the third out occurs because a runner is declared out for interference on a foul batted ball, the batter-runner is considered to have completed his at-bat, and the first batter up the following inning will be the player who follows him in the batting order...

[calablue]

Thank you. Just to clarify, is the statement “the batter returns to bat counting the foul ball” a quote from the milbum or are those your words?

[calablue]

Senor Azul. I apologize if I’ve insulted you. That was not my intent.  I am simply want him to find out if that particular sentence was included in the rule that you quoted, or if you deduced it by using a combination of rules that I have not been able to find. Thank you

[Jimurray]

On 1/10/2024 at 12:28 AM, Senor Azul said:

 

 

Bonus bit of information--if the third out occurs because a runner is declared out for interference on a foul batted ball, the batter-runner is considered to have completed his at-bat, and the first batter up the following inning will be the player who follows him in the batting order...

Do you have a cite for that in OBR. I believe NCAA has the batter who was at bat return to bat the next inning. 

[ArchAngel72]

So just clarifying something.

 

Is it also true that any runner must allow the fielder the room to catch the ball. ie  they cannot stand like a pole on the base and presume they are safe from committing interference.   They are allowed to move around said base so they can keep a foot attached to it. but they need to give the fielder room to catch the ball... 

 

least thats how it was explained to me with regards to runners and fielders on a pop up around a bag.

[Jimurray]

21 minutes ago, ArchAngel72 said:

So just clarifying something.

 

Is it also true that any runner must allow the fielder the room to catch the ball. ie  they cannot stand like a pole on the base and presume they are safe from committing interference.   They are allowed to move around said base so they can keep a foot attached to it. but they need to give the fielder room to catch the ball... 

 

least thats how it was explained to me with regards to runners and fielders on a pop up around a bag.

They can stand like a pole. But they are at risk of the umpire misapplying the rule as one MLB umpire did. 

[Richvee]

2 hours ago, Jimurray said:

Do you have a cite for that in OBR. I believe NCAA has the batter who was at bat return to bat the next inning. 

I’m pretty sure that’s correct. Batter hasn’t completed his AB according to NCAA. (Unless that’s the one I got wrong) 

[Jimurray]

15 minutes ago, Richvee said:

I’m pretty sure that’s correct. Batter hasn’t completed his AB according to NCAA. (Unless that’s the one I got wrong) 

Yes, found it as an added note:

"Note 3: If a runner is declared out for interference with a fielder who is attempting to field a foul batted ball and there are less than two outs when the interference occurs, the batter will complete their at bat. If the third out occurs due to the interference, the current batter will be the first batter up the following inning."

[ArchAngel72]

2 hours ago, Jimurray said:

They can stand like a pole. But they are at risk of the umpire misapplying the rule as one MLB umpire did. 

I was lead to believe they cannot stand on the bag like a pole and need to "evade" in order to allow the fielder to field the ball.   as in they are not entitled to the base like a batter is the batters box... 

[Jimurray]

3 minutes ago, ArchAngel72 said:

I was lead to believe they cannot stand on the bag like a pole and need to "evade" in order to allow the fielder to field the ball.   as in they are not entitled to the base like a batter is the batters box... 

You were lead by someone who hasn't read the rules. From OBR:

"Rule 6.01(a) Penalty for Interference Comment: A runner who is adjudged to have hindered a fielder who is attempting to make a play on a batted ball is out whether it was intentional or not. If, however, the runner has contact with a legally occupied base when he hinders the fielder, he shall not be called out unless, in the umpire’s judgment, such hindrance, whether it occurs on fair or foul territory, is intentional. If the umpire declares the hindrance intentional, the following penalty shall apply: With less than two out, the umpire shall declare both the runner and batter out. With two out, the umpire shall declare the batter out."

[Jimurray]

35 minutes ago, Richvee said:

I’m pretty sure that’s correct. Batter hasn’t completed his AB according to NCAA. (Unless that’s the one I got wrong) 

Also found the FED ruling which is the same as NCAA. Childress BRD cites all 3 codes as the same unless @Senor Azul can give us an opposing cite from OBR:

2010 Interps:

"SITUATION 6: R1, on second base, rounds third and runs into F5 as he attempts to field a foul fly ball. This action occurred with (a) a count of 1-1; (b) a count of 1-2; or (c) two outs. RULING: In all three instances, R1 is out for his interference. In (a), the batter returns to bat with a count of 1-2 and in (b), the batter returns to bat with a count of 1-2 as the pitch is treated as a foul for the batter’s count. In (c), B4 will lead off in his team’s next offensive half-inning. (7-4-1f)"

You have to infer that with 2 outs we have R1 on 2B, B2 and B3 out, and B4 as the current batter who leads off the next inning.

[Senor Azul]

Mr. calablue, the text I posted is from a section in the 2021 MiLBUM titled "Runner Interferes on an Infield Fly." Here's how the statement you would like clarified actually appears on page 101:

The batter-runner returns to bat counting the foul ball.

I didn't put quotes around the text because I was trying to take a shortcut so I edited it a bit. Later in the same section but on the following page it states a second time that the pitch counts. The last paragraph is my own writing trying to tell you about the second reference.

[Velho]

10 hours ago, Jimurray said:

On 1/9/2024 at 10:28 PM, Senor Azul said:

 

 

Bonus bit of information--if the third out occurs because a runner is declared out for interference on a foul batted ball, the batter-runner is considered to have completed his at-bat, and the first batter up the following inning will be the player who follows him in the batting order...

Do you have a cite for that in OBR. I believe NCAA has the batter who was at bat return to bat the next inning. 

 

8 hours ago, Jimurray said:

8 hours ago, Richvee said:

I’m pretty sure that’s correct. Batter hasn’t completed his AB according to NCAA. (Unless that’s the one I got wrong) 

Also found the FED ruling which is the same as NCAA. Childress BRD cites all 3 codes as the same unless @Senor Azul can give us an opposing cite from OBR:

2010 Interps:

"SITUATION 6: R1, on second base, rounds third and runs into F5 as he attempts to field a foul fly ball. This action occurred with (a) a count of 1-1; (b) a count of 1-2; or (c) two outs. RULING: In all three instances, R1 is out for his interference. In (a), the batter returns to bat with a count of 1-2 and in (b), the batter returns to bat with a count of 1-2 as the pitch is treated as a foul for the batter’s count. In (c), B4 will lead off in his team’s next offensive half-inning. (7-4-1f)"

You have to infer that with 2 outs we have R1 on 2B, B2 and B3 out, and B4 as the current batter who leads off the next inning.

In OBR, Batter's AB is over on runner interference with 2 outs:

OBR Rule 6.01(a)(10) "He fails to avoid a fielder who is attempting to field a batted ball, or intentionally interferes with a thrown ball, provided that if two or more fielders attempt to field a batted ball, and the runner comes in contact with one or more of them, the umpire shall determine which fielder is entitled to the benefit of this rule, and shall not declare the runner out for coming in contact with a fielder other than the one the umpire determines to be entitled to field such a ball. The umpire shall call the runner out in accordance with Rule 5.09(b)(3). If the third out occurs because a runner is declared out for interference on a foul batted ball, the batter-runner is considered to have completed his at bat, and the first batter up the following inning will be the player who follows him in the batting order (if there are less than two outs, the batter will complete his at-bat). If the batter-runner is adjudged not to have hindered a fielder attempting to make a play on a batted ball, and if the base runner’s interference is adjudged not to be intentional, the batter-runner shall be awarded first base;"

[Velho]

@calablue to add on to @Senor Azul point on response, I've attached a picture of the MiLB manual being quoted (just to avoid any possible remaining confusions)

 

[Senor Azul]

As Hans Landa would say, Mr. Velho, "That's a bingo!" Rule 6.01(a)(10) is the OBR cite. And the rest of my answer appears on the top of page 102 in the MiLBUM.

As for Mr. Jimurray's NCAA citation, that Note 3 can be found in rule 8-5d in the 2023-2024 rule book and it is a new addition.

[Velho]

9 hours ago, Senor Azul said:

As for Mr. Jimurray's NCAA citation, that Note 3 can be found in rule 8-5d in the 2023-2024 rule book and it is a new addition.

Makes one wonder why the divergence? NCAA is not recreational with concerns about getting everyone playing time.

[ArchAngel72]

I am wondering if LL covers this differently 

[Jimurray]

11 hours ago, Senor Azul said:

As Hans Landa would say, Mr. Velho, "That's a bingo!" Rule 6.01(a)(10) is the OBR cite. And the rest of my answer appears on the top of page 102 in the MiLBUM.

As for Mr. Jimurray's NCAA citation, that Note 3 can be found in rule 8-5d in the 2023-2024 rule book and it is a new addition.

 

2 hours ago, Velho said:

Makes one wonder why the divergence? NCAA is not recreational with concerns about getting everyone playing time.

 

58 minutes ago, ArchAngel72 said:

I am wondering if LL covers this differently 

OBR did not add this ruling until about 2020 but possibly always had this as an unofficial interp. LL would not have this in their old format book but since they mostly follow OBR they probably would rule the same. NCAA says they defer to OBR interps if it's not covered by their rules and they tend to follow OBR but sometimes they think they are following OBR when they make a rule change and they get it wrong. FED used to call the batter out with a foul fly INT but changed in 2010 and when they did added the interp that the batter's time at bat did not end.

[Richvee]

You never stop learning. Never knew this was the case in OBR.  OBR's rule is clear. That said, I have a hard time with the logic. Batter didn't complete his AB. He wasn't put out, he didn't reach first..he hit a foul ball. For me, it's similar to a runner getting picked off or CS for the 3rd out, and then saying the batter's AB is over. But that's just me, I guess.

 

[beerguy55]

2 hours ago, Richvee said:

You never stop learning. Never knew this was the case in OBR.  OBR's rule is clear. That said, I have a hard time with the logic. Batter didn't complete his AB. He wasn't put out, he didn't reach first..he hit a foul ball. For me, it's similar to a runner getting picked off or CS for the 3rd out, and then saying the batter's AB is over. But that's just me, I guess.

 

I suspect it's another case of some rule maker outsmarting himself.

I can't see any logical reason to punish the batter - he did nothing wrong, and there's no reason to revoke him of a fresh at bat...this is unlike batter INT on R3 stealing, where R3 is out with less than two outs, and batter is out if the third out...it's the batter who caused the infraction there (and you're calling R3 out with 0/1 out to remove any second or third chances of R3 scoring - for the third out, you're revoking batter's right to a fresh at bat...for something HE did).

The only thing I can think of is someone, using poor logic, decided those two outcomes needed to be consistent.

The only time batter should be out here if he's the one who interfered with the catch in foul territory.

[Velho]

4 hours ago, Jimurray said:

OBR did not add this ruling until about 2020 but possibly always had this as an unofficial interp. LL would not have this in their old format book but since they mostly follow OBR they probably would rule the same.

Confirmed. This is not covered in the LL RIM (which is rulebook inclusive) so would default to OBR, i.e. AB is completed with runner interference on a 2 out foul ball.

[BigBlue4u]

On 1/9/2024 at 10:28 PM, Senor Azul said:

From the 2021 Minor League Baseball Umpire Manual (section 6.11, p. 101):

If runner interference is called during an infield fly, the ball remains alive until it is determined whether the ball is fair or foul...If foul, even if caught, the runner is out and the batter returns to bat...

The batter returns to bat counting the foul ball.

In other words the pitch counts according to the MiLBUM. Bonus bit of information--if the third out occurs because a runner is declared out for interference on a foul batted ball, the batter-runner is considered to have completed his at-bat, and the first batter up the following inning will be the player who follows him in the batting order...

Sr. Azul...I'm confused by the bonus bit of information.  Does this bonus bit refer to an infield fly situation?  If so, since an infield fly can only be called with less than two out, how could a double play (3rd out) occur in this situation?  If you are referring to a non-infield fly situation, I get it. Thanks.

[beerguy55]

28 minutes ago, BigBlue4u said:

r. Azul...I'm confused by the bonus bit of information.  Does this bonus bit refer to an infield fly situation?  If so, since an infield fly can only be called with less than two out, how could a double play (3rd out) occur in this situation?  If you are referring to a non-infield fly situation, I get it. Thanks.

No - just two out.  He simply saying that, in OBR, instead of the runner who interfered with the foul ball it's (effectively) the batter who makes the third out.

A DP can occur in an IFF - the batter is out because of the IFF (if fair)...if the runner interferes with a fielder he's out too (no?)...in that scenario it's moot...the batter is out so of course their at bat is over.  The scenario in question is about a foul ball, where the batter wouldn't be out due to IFF.

[BigBlue4u]

beerguy55,

Thanks for the info.  Now that I think of it, it's possible for a triple play on an infield fly situation.  IFF.  R1 then passes R2 who is standing just past 2B.  Ball comes down and hits R2. Result:  Batter out on IFF.  R1 out for passing R2. and R2 out for being hit with a fair ball.  And, to quote the ever-popular Senor Azul, here is a bonus bit of information:  How can a triple play occur with no defensive player touching the ball?

It's a great trivia question and very few people that I have asked even come close to the correct answer.