Backswing Interference

[johnnyg08]

 

[johnnyg08]

I'll take clueless announcers for $400 Ken. 

[The Man in Blue]

I understand why the runner was sent back to third base, but the [batter who just struck out and hit the catcher in the head] should be awarded first base.  I know its a dead ball, but . . . 

I know you are a homer and that is your job, but in what world does that logic even make sense?

[grayhawk]

Some genius on X insisted that the catcher "had his entire head on top of  the plate" and said the rule is stupid because the catcher can just dive his head into the path of the bat on the backswing to get this call.

I felt it necessary to remind him that catchers (or anyone, really) don't like to get their heads hit by large sticks.

[johnnyg08]

7 hours ago, grayhawk said:

Some genius on X insisted that the catcher "had his entire head on top of  the plate" and said the rule is stupid because the catcher can just dive his head into the path of the bat on the backswing to get this call.

I felt it necessary to remind him that catchers (or anyone, really) don't like to get their heads hit by large sticks.

OMG, people are morons. Ugh

[maven]

7 hours ago, grayhawk said:

Some genius on X...

Well there's your mistake right there. 

[ArchAngel72]

1 hour ago, maven said:

Well there's your mistake right there. 

 

Might I suggest Grayhawk was merely being polite in an open forum instead of saying "F***t*rd"

I mean not everyone is ok with fornicating engine brakes 

 

[BLWizzRanger]

Ok, can we talk NFHS here - aka follow through interference? I had two clear cut follow-through interference (FTI) calls that I know I got right in the beginning of the season, but, I am trying to pre-think and get into my head around on other FTIs where applicable.  So to start, NFHS mentions follow-through interference in 7-3.5c -

the batter shall not (c) make any other movement, including FTI, which hinders actions at home plate or the catcher's attempt to play on a runner.

Probably splitting hairs here so I expect to be corrected which means I get to learn.  The following scenarios come to mind with FTI (DB - Dead Ball & DDB - Delayed Dead Ball) :

a. No runner on - no FTI, DB
b. Foul popup where ball reaches the stands (as compared to 'i' below) - no FTI.
c. dropped third strike - FTI, DB, BR out, runners return
d. Runner on 1st or 2nd - FTI, DDB  if runner(s) were trying to steal a bag - batter out, runners return.
e. Runner on 1st or 2nd, strike three on batter - FTI, DDB  if runner(s) were trying to steal a bag - batter out, runners out.

f. Runner on 3rd - FTI, DB, if runner was trying to steal home - runner out.
g. Bunt where catcher is the protected fielder - FTI, DDB, BR out
h. Fair Popup where catcher is the protected fielder - FTI, DDB, BR out
i. Foul popup where catcher is the protected fielder - FTI, DDB, BR out
 

[The Man in Blue]

12 hours ago, grayhawk said:

Some genius on X insisted that the catcher "had his entire head on top of  the plate" and said the rule is stupid because the catcher can just dive his head into the path of the bat on the backswing to get this call.

I felt it necessary to remind him that catchers (or anyone, really) don't like to get their heads hit by large sticks.

Are you sure there aren’t people who do like getting it in the head with large sticks?  I mean, you read the post you are referring to … 

[The Man in Blue]

2 hours ago, BLWizzRanger said:

 

f. Runner on 3rd - FTI, DB, if runner was trying to steal home - runner out.
g. Bunt where catcher is the protected fielder - FTI, DDB, BR out
h. Fair Popup where catcher is the protected fielder - FTI, DDB, BR out
i. Foul popup where catcher is the protected fielder - FTI, DDB, BR out
 

In (f), shouldn’t that be batter out, runner returns?

In (g) how do you get FTI on a bunt?!  😁

(h) and (i) … protected fielder does not matter.  Or am I misunderstanding something?

[maven]

3 hours ago, ArchAngel72 said:

 

Might I suggest Grayhawk was merely being polite in an open forum instead of saying "F***t*rd"

I mean not everyone is ok with fornicating engine brakes 

I wasn't probing his ironic use of 'genius', but rather suggesting that social media here, as in so many other instances, is the root of the problem.

[Vegas_Ump]

I have seen this play on Reels.  Backswing contact has only recently been added to OBR.  To me, the crux of the discussion is based on the lack of knowledge by the play-by-play crew.

Back when I was young, you'd find approved rulings in discussions by Carl Childress (and others) that have been codified in one way or another in the more recent books.

The fact that the batter offered at a pitch for strike three was why he was out.  The follow-thru contact made the play dead.  So runners can't advance.  But it was apparently not ruled interference.

It does bother me that big batters can swing around and clock the catcher without penalty........mostly.  I could see a Rawlings McMuffin coming on the next pitch.

Mike

Las Vegas

 

[BLWizzRanger]

10 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

In (f), shouldn’t that be batter out, runner returns?

In (g) how do you get FTI on a bunt?!  😁

(h) and (i) … protected fielder does not matter.  Or am I misunderstanding something?

Yeah, for (g), 10 mins after I posted, I realized that a bunt scenario is silly but I couldn't get to the post to modify it in until now.

For (h) and (i), I am trying to say that the catcher is the only one who had a chance at making the catch near the plate or at the backstop. Near the backstop, if the ball is out of play, there couldn't be FTI, right? There isn't a chance to catch the ball. But, maybe there was a chance to catch it at the plate or in foul territory that is hindered by FTI.

For (f), that is the penalty for a runner on third trying to come home in any situation.  "Where there are not two outs and the runner is advancing to home plate, if the runner is tagged out, the ball remains live and interference is ignored.  Otherwise, the ball is dead and the runner is called out."