Batter's Interference

[Jay R.]

PONY Bronco (12U), so modified OBR

R2 is advancing on a low ball; F2 blocks it cleanly and is on his feet quickly. After the swing, the batter steps toward third base (but still in the box). F2 barehands the ball and pumps at third, realizes he's gonna drill the batter, and shuffles left. Batter has no idea what's going on and steps out of the box, right into F2's path and F2 lowers his arm. 

I called interference and (incorrectly) called the runner out and resume the at-bat. 

Aside from the fact that I penalized the runner, I am hearing from a couple people (including my assignor) that

a) I shouldn't have called the interference because the batter was in the box on the initial attempt. 

b) I shouldn't have called the interference because the catcher never made an actual throw.

I don't believe that to be the case and can find some blogs that support that but am having trouble finding rule or formal interpretation guidance. Anyone?

Given the age level also curious about NFHS and LL if anyone wants to chime in.

 

[Jimurray]

20 minutes ago, Jay R. said:

PONY Bronco (12U), so modified OBR

R2 is advancing on a low ball; F2 blocks it cleanly and is on his feet quickly. After the swing, the batter steps toward third base (but still in the box). F2 barehands the ball and pumps at third, realizes he's gonna drill the batter, and shuffles left. Batter has no idea what's going on and steps out of the box, right into F2's path and F2 lowers his arm. 

I called interference and (incorrectly) called the runner out and resume the at-bat. 

Aside from the fact that I penalized the runner, I am hearing from a couple people (including my assignor) that

a) I shouldn't have called the interference because the batter was in the box on the initial attempt. 

b) I shouldn't have called the interference because the catcher never made an actual throw.

I don't believe that to be the case and can find some blogs that support that but am having trouble finding rule or formal interpretation guidance. Anyone?

Given the age level also curious about NFHS and LL if anyone wants to chime in.

 

a) Sounds like it was part of the swing and sill in the box. So no INT.

b) You don't need a throw on CI: 

"6.03(a)(3) He interferes with the catcher’s fielding or throwing by stepping out of the batter’s box or making any other movement that hinders the catcher’s play at home base."

When assignors or rule interpreters tell you kicked it they should cite you the rule.

 

[BigBlue4u]

13 minutes ago, Jay R. said:

a) I shouldn't have called the interference because the batter was in the box on the initial attempt. 

b) I shouldn't have called the interference because the catcher never made an actual throw.

I don't believe that to be the case and can find some blogs that support that but am having trouble finding rule or formal interpretation guidance. Anyone?

The reasoning for answer A is incorrect.  The question is, Did the batter have reasonable time (umpire judgment) to vacate the space?  Example.  Right-handed hitter, R2 steals third.  We can't expect the batter to disappear, so, unless the batter deliberately interferes, we have nothing.  Different situation. Pitch gets away from the catcher and rolls a few feet to the catcher's right.  He runs over to pick up the ball.  The batter never moves.  Catcher's throw to third hits the batter.  Chances are this will be interference if the umpire believes the batter had reasonable time to move.

B.  There needs to be more information.  Why did the catcher never make an actual throw?  Did he just stand there?  Did he start to make a throw but stop because the batter was in the way? Also, it's standard practice if someone says you are wrong about a play, ask them to cite the rule.

 

[maven]

10 hours ago, Jay R. said:

After the swing, the batter steps toward third base (but still in the box).

I disagree with everyone.

1. The assignor is incorrect: his statement suggests that the box is safe haven. It is not: it's quite possible to have batter INT while the batter remains in the box (several different ways, in fact).
2. Whoever said a throw is required for there to be batter INT is incorrect: it's simply nowhere in the rule.
3. The poster who says that stepping toward 3B after the swing is part of a normal swing is incorrect. It is not: some batter step out as they stride, but that's not what happened in the OP.
4. The poster who says the batter needs to vacate the box is incorrect (or, for this play, irrelevant): when F2 pops up to throw, this provision does not apply. It applies when the ball gets away from F2, and the batter has time to vacate the area.

As I read the play, this is clearly batter INT. The batter violated the rule prohibiting him from making "any other movement" (besides a swing) and hindering F2's play. The "any other movement" was stepping toward 3B; the hindrance was preventing F2 from throwing.

The batter INT rule is complex (as the OP realizes from the penalty he invoked), and it is subject to many myths and misconceptions. 

[SeeingEyeDog]

I just want to add...

Umpires need to know ALL the rules, of course but, for those of us calling youth baseball the rules we REALLY need to know are those centered around safety. For as long as baseball has been around and how popular it is, it never ceases to amaze me that coaches, players, parents and yes...even a few umpires don't fundamentally understand that the reason the rules change as the players get older is because of safety and by extension...liability and duty of care.

Batter interference of the catcher like many interference calls can be difficult calls for any umpire at any level to make. There is a lot happening very quickly and our initial focus is on calling the pitch. It's disturbing to me when batter interference is not called (for any reason...) and there is typically a fan and sadly sometimes a coach who will then crow to their catcher, "Johnny? If that happens again...you put it in his ear!" Being a coach is a special position of privilege and authority in a youth athlete's life. What I hear when I hear a coach or a parent say something like this is over-emphasized regret that a call didn't go their way...whether it should have or not. But, kids don't have that kind of filter. Your coach tells you to run foul lines until you puke, you do it. Your coach tells you to pitch inside on a batter when you're not comfortable yet doing that, you do it. Your coach tells you to "put the ball in his ear next time..." guess what...they're gonna' do that, too. If it's a coach saying something like this, that's an easy grab..."Coach, are you instructing your player to deliberately injure another player?" When it's a parent from the stands, that's more challenging because we are trained "...do not talk to fences."

This is one of the times I break that rule. Fortunately, I've only done it a handful of times and it's more of a polite request, "Ma'am/Sir, please do not instruct players to deliberately injure another player..."

~Dawg

[beerguy55]

On 5/30/2024 at 9:15 PM, Jimurray said:

a) Sounds like it was part of the swing and sill in the box. So no INT.

I'd say this is very rare - some batters step towards the base on their swing with their front foot, but after the swing batters typically (almost always) step and fall towards the plate, not the base, if we're talking about full momentum of the continuation of the swing.

If the batter stepped towards third base after the swing it's almost certainly an act after the swing has finished.

[Vegas_Ump]

Sitch 1:  F2 cleanly catches the pitch.  You cannot expect the batter to disappear.  If he takes it cleanly or even swings and misses, he normally cannot be called for BI.  However, suppose the play is a pitchout.  If the batter comes across the plate ostensibly to swing at the ball--but you judge he intentionally tried to interfere with the catcher--, you have intent, and you can call BI.

Sitch 2:  Pitch is a passed ball/wild pitch.  [Ever see any of those is youth leagues?]  Now the batter does not have sanctuary in the batter's box.  He has to clear out and let the defense play.  (I have seen some coaches teach their batters to run to the backstop to eliminate all doubt.)  If the batter lollygags around and blocks the catcher's attempt, what have you got?  Catcher throws, but wildly.  Do you judge the Batter intentionally blocked the play?  You have a play that you can judge was interfered with.  It would be definitional Offensive Interference.  (And NOT BI!)   OR, the catcher holds up his throw, because the batter is in the way.  You calling that?  (What play was there to interfere with?)  OR, catcher clocks the batter on the back of the neck for being in the way......Well, that's when a lot of trouble will start.  You have some judgment to exercise here.

Mike

Las Vegas

[rhanna]

On 5/31/2024 at 9:43 AM, SeeingEyeDog said:

It's disturbing to me when batter interference is not called (for any reason...) and there is typically a fan and sadly sometimes a coach who will then crow to their catcher, "Johnny? If that happens again...you put it in his ear!"

I totally agree with you on the safety aspect.

If, in the case of the OP, there is a rules interpretation that says "no batter interference without a throwing attempt" in play, how should we coach our catchers?  Clearly not to hit the batter in the head.  I'd consider making a throwing motion that contacts the batter but not releasing the ball, but that's still not great from a safety perspective.  Any advice on this?

Similarly (not to get off track), but what about obstruction?  This is particularly difficult because, at lower levels, with a one-man crew, the umpire is watching the play and may not pick up obstruction of a runner away from the ball.  I have heard many coaches tell their runner to run into the fielder in this case to make it obvious.  Any advice here? 

[Aging_Arbiter]

On 6/25/2024 at 2:04 PM, rhanna said:

how should we coach our catchers?

Coach them however you want to avoid/throw around a batter that WILL NOT disappear.

 

On 6/25/2024 at 2:04 PM, rhanna said:

with a one-man crew

one man.....is NOT a crew.  Merely a target for blame.  There are so many holes in a 2-umpire system, that 1 umpire is bound to miss something.

[834k3r]

On 6/25/2024 at 11:04 AM, rhanna said:

If, in the case of the OP, there is a rules interpretation that says "no batter interference without a throwing attempt" in play, how should we coach our catchers?  Clearly not to hit the batter in the head.  I'd consider making a throwing motion that contacts the batter but not releasing the ball, but that's still not great from a safety perspective.  Any advice on this?

As a parent to a catcher, I learned through my son's training that catchers should be taught to clear the batter (especially a RHB, but could be applicable to LHB in a back-pick to 1B) first. If the batter moves with the catcher then the plate umpire (hopefully) will see it and adjudicate accordingly.

1 hour ago, Aging_Arbiter said:

one man.....is NOT a crew.  Merely a target for blame.  There are so many holes in a 2-umpire system, that 1 umpire is bound to miss something.

💯. One of the reasons I will not accept one-man games on a big field. It's manageable on a LL (60') field, but won't be doing those in the future (see separate thread) either.

[beerguy55]

19 hours ago, 834k3r said:

As a parent to a catcher, I learned through my son's training that catchers should be taught to clear the batter

Or just be really good.   I was once picked off at third base by a catcher who threw the ball between the batter's arms, bat and head (a space not much bigger than the ball) - I literally watched the ball come out of that chute, go directly past my eyes, and into the third baseman's glove for the third out.   Still standing there with a stupid look on my face, not yet understanding what happened, as the defense left the field.

[834k3r]

5 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

Or just be really good.   I was once picked off at third base by a catcher who threw the ball between the batter's arms, bat and head (a space not much bigger than the ball) - I literally watched the ball come out of that chute, go directly past my eyes, and into the third baseman's glove for the third out.   Still standing there with a stupid look on my face, not yet understanding what happened, as the defense left the field.

Sounds like a Jadier Molina laser.