Batter Interference Timing Play?

[Zachary]

Forgive me if this has already been answered. 

Hypothetical: Runners on 2nd and 3rd, two outs. Wild pitch, R3 scores. R2 rounds third and also comes home, and the umpire deems the batter interfered with the catcher while R2 was trying to score. Batter is out. Does the run that R3 scored count? It happened before the interference call while R2 was trying to score, but the batter was also out before reaching first base. 

[grayhawk]

16 minutes ago, Zachary said:

Forgive me if this has already been answered. 

Hypothetical: Runners on 2nd and 3rd, two outs. Wild pitch, R3 scores. R2 rounds third and also comes home, and the umpire deems the batter interfered with the catcher while R2 was trying to score. Batter is out. Does the run that R3 scored count? It happened before the interference call while R2 was trying to score, but the batter was also out before reaching first base. 

Yes, R3's run scores. One of the three exceptions for scoring involves the batter-RUNNER being put out before reaching first base. In this case, he was still a batter, not a batter-runner. 

Now, if the wild pitch was ball 4, and he had become the batter-runner and was hanging around the plate area with his thumb up his ass and interfered, then no runs would score.

[Velho]

15 minutes ago, Zachary said:

Hypothetical: Runners on 2nd and 3rd, two outs. Wild pitch, R3 scores. R2 rounds third and also comes home, and the umpire deems the batter interfered with the catcher while R2 was trying to score. Batter is out. Does the run that R3 scored count?

We've discussed this before on here (no issue with you asking, just referencing that we have. I can't find the thread easily but you may have better luck if interested in details).

As said above, R3 run scores.

[beerguy55]

3 hours ago, grayhawk said:

es, R3's run scores. One of the three exceptions for scoring involves the batter-RUNNER being put out before reaching first base. In this case, he was still a batter, not a batter-runner. 

The distinction between batter and batter-runner is irrelevant here, and would lead to an incorrect interpretation of the rule.  Due to 5.05(a)

• A batter does not become a runner on a caught third strike.
• A batter does not become a runner on an uncaught third strike if first is occupied with less than two out
• A batter does not become a runner on any foul ball, including one that is caught.

In those cases the batter making the third out still nullifies the run.

The run may indeed count in the OP, but not for the reason you specify.

If R3's run counts it's due to some TOI provision.

 

[grayhawk]

6 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

The distinction between batter and batter-runner is irrelevant here, and would lead to an incorrect interpretation of the rule.  Due to 5.05(a)

• A batter does not become a runner on a caught third strike.
• A batter does not become a runner on an uncaught third strike if first is occupied with less than two out
• A batter does not become a runner on any foul ball, including one that is caught.

In those cases the batter making the third out still nullifies the run.

The run may indeed count in the OP, but not for the reason you specify.

If R3's run counts it's due to some TOI provision.

 

The OP asked specifically about the batter being out before reaching first base. In the case of a ball 4 wild pitch, the batter has become a runner and was called out for interference before reaching first base. The run cannot score in that scenario.

[maven]

19 hours ago, grayhawk said:

Now, if the wild pitch was ball 4, and he had become the batter-runner and was hanging around the plate area with his thumb up his ass and interfered, then no runs would score.

The rule does not strictly require this part. 😉

15 hours ago, grayhawk said:

The OP asked specifically about the batter being out before reaching first base. In the case of a ball 4 wild pitch, the batter has become a runner and was called out for interference before reaching first base. The run cannot score in that scenario.

Agree. A 'walk' or base on balls (as you know, but filling in some blanks more generally) is an award of 1B. An award is the right to advance without liability to be retired by the defense, but the advance must be legal.

When the BR interferes, he has not advanced legally, and the award lapses. Because he did not legally touch 1B and made the 3rd out, no run can score.

[beerguy55]

18 hours ago, grayhawk said:

The OP asked specifically about the batter being out before reaching first base. In the case of a ball 4 wild pitch, the batter has become a runner and was called out for interference before reaching first base. The run cannot score in that scenario.

Nothing to do with what I was saying or disputing.

You clearly made a point to say that the exception to the run scoring before the third out applies to the "batter-RUNNER" getting out before reaching first - your emphasis - to explain why R3's run would count.  I was responding to that statement.   There are very clearly times where the batter never becomes a runner for the third out, and the run most definitely does not score in those scenarios, even though they're not a batter-runner. (eg. caught third strike, caught foul ball, etc)

So, there must be some other distinction in the OP (where it is not ball four) that allows the first run to score, even though the batter very clearly made the third out, while they were still a batter.   I'm suspecting TOI.   Or, there is no distinction, and no runs score.

 

I'm even wondering if the run would count if there was less than two outs, provided this was ball four...

If the umpire declares the batter, batter-runner, or a runner out for interference, all other runners shall return to the last base that was in the judgment of the umpire, legally touched at the time of the interference, unless otherwise provided by these rules. In the event the batter-runner has not reached first base, all runners shall return to the base last occupied at the time of the pitch;

[maven]

~

[beerguy55]

3 minutes ago, maven said:

The batter's not out, R2 is.

R2's advance is covered by 6.01(a)(3):

With two out the batter is out, isn't he?

[noumpere]

1 hour ago, beerguy55 said:

With two out the batter is out, isn't he?

Yes.  But, if the batter interferes before the run scores, it's a time play.  If the batter "interferes" after the run scores then what did the batter interfere with?

 

Or, maybe I've just lost track of the thread.

[Tborze]

34 minutes ago, noumpere said:

Yes.  But, if the batter interferes before the run scores, it's a time play.  If the batter "interferes" after the run scores then what did the batter interfere with?

 

Or, maybe I've just lost track of the thread.

There is BI on a play at the plate with 2 outs!  

[beerguy55]

1 hour ago, noumpere said:

Yes.  But, if the batter interferes before the run scores, it's a time play.  If the batter "interferes" after the run scores then what did the batter interfere with?

 

Or, maybe I've just lost track of the thread

It was a response to Maven's assertion that the runner made the third out...which indeed would be a time play.

But if the batter is out, it's not a time play (typically)...though we may have an exception in the OP.

By rule, this is what we know (I think):

- a run doesn't score if the batter makes the third out before safely reaching first base (doesn't have to be a batter/runner)

- with two outs, BI results in the batter being out and R2's run not counting  (R3 TBD)

- with less than two outs, BI results in the runner being out and all other runners returned TOI  (R3 scores)

- If the batter/runner (eg. ball four) commits INT they are out and runners return TOI, but if they INT before reaching first base all runners return TOP??  (I assume this is applicable for both RLI - intervening play aside - AND the proverbial B/R sticking around with his thumb up his ass)

 

In the OP, the batter makes the third out while still a batter, after R3 scores, but in interfering with a play on R2.  All on continuing action from a WP.  To go further, no play was made on R3 - they simply scored on the WP.

If this was ball four, there seems to be consensus that neither run scores, because batter/runner made the third out before reaching first base (and maybe even because runners return TOP).

If it's not ball four, meaning batter is still a batter...the batter made the third out before safely reaching first...

- Does the first run score because of TOI?

- Does the first run not score because batter made third out?

- Does the first run not score because runners return TOP?

 

[Tborze]

He’s a batter not a BR so, 

Yes 

No

No

 

[maven]

1 hour ago, noumpere said:

Yes.  But, if the batter interferes before the run scores, it's a time play.  If the batter "interferes" after the run scores then what did the batter interfere with?

 

Or, maybe I've just lost track of the thread.

You lost track. 2 runs scored on the wild pitch, R3 and R2, with the batter interfering with the play on R2. The question concerns whether R3's run counts.

Here's another way to process it. The general rule is that a run counts if it's scored before the 3rd out—in general, plays are time plays. There are 3 exceptions, and this isn't one of them, so R3's run counts.

[MadMax]

Accompanying @maven’s and @noumpere’s point(s), this isn’t one long continuous play, by which we apply a TOP “timestamp”. On the wild pitch (WP), once the F2 retrieves it, Live and in-play, it ceases to be regarded as a pitch. This is construed this way, because once the F2 fields it, and if he was to propel it OOP, or mis-throw it towards the plate such that it goes OOP, the award becomes 2 bases time-of-misplay / TOT.
in this case, both R3 and R2 advanced one base, and R2 attempted to score. This is now a subsequent-but-separate play. Technically, the Batter is no longer a Batter, but is instead “team personnel allowed to be there (in play)”, similar to a Base Coach or the On Deck Hitter. Or, a Scored Runner.

What if the Scored Runner (R3) was the one that caused the INT instead of the (current) Batter? You can’t call R3 Out, he’s already scored. Instead, because of the INT, we have to call the Runner upon which the play is being attempted Out (in this case, R2). 

As such, R2 is Out, and if the count on that pitch (WP) didn’t become 4-X (BB) or X-3 (U3K), then Batter would still be at-bat, or lead off next inning. 

[beerguy55]

2 hours ago, Tborze said:

He’s a batter not a BR so, 

Once again, this distinction doesn't matter.  I can think of at least two situations where the batter makes an out without ever becoming a batter-runner, where the ball is live, where the BATTER making the third out cancels the run.

- R3 breaks for home, F1 starts delivery, R3 touches home, caught third strike 

- R3 crosses plate before a foul ball is caught (and no, we don't make the defense appeal...we nullify the run)

 

58 minutes ago, MadMax said:

once the F2 retrieves it, Live and in-play, it ceases to be regarded as a pitch. This is construed this way, because once the F2 fields it, and if he was to propel it OOP, or mis-throw it towards the plate such that it goes OOP, the award becomes 2 bases time-of-misplay / TOT. This is now a subsequent-but-separate play. Technically, the Batter is no longer a Batter, but is instead “team personnel allowed to be there (in play)”, similar to a Base Coach or the On Deck Hitter. Or, a Scored Runner.

Careful here - I see the logic and I think it makes the most sense...BUT...for example, when F2 catches a pitch and attempts to throw out R2 stealing third, which is a subsequent and separate play, that is no longer a pitch, the batter is still a batter who can be put out for BI, or if F2 simply makes a bad throw into the dugout the 2 bases TOT award applies.

By rule and definition a batter remains a batter until they are put out or become a runner.

[MadMax]

4 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

for example, when F2 catches a pitch and attempts to throw out R2 stealing third, which is a subsequent and separate play, that is no longer a pitch, the batter is still a batter who can be put out for BI, or if F2 simply makes a bad throw into the dugout the 2 bases TOT award applies.

Uhhh… “when F2 catches a pitch” and attempts to throw out a stealing R2 of 3B is a “direct, first play”. This is quite a bit different than the ball getting away from F2, by either WP or PB, that same R2 arriving at (and rounding) 3B, and then the F2 throws to 3B / F5 to try to backpick that Runner. 
The reason I’m pointing this out, is that at some point, the threshold for “pure” Batter Interference has to be crossed / reached. We cannot expect a Batter to stay still in the box once the ball is loose and unsecured. 
If on this play, R2 attempts a steal of 3B, and F2 catches it clean, and the Batter moves in a manner that hinders the F2 (AWK, we don’t need contact, or a throw necessarily), we call BI. Got it. However, if this same R2 steals 3B, and the pitched ball gets away from F2, we generally absolve, or at least give greater latitude to, the Batter to get out of the way or stay clear of the F2… do we not? 
That threshold for BI goes up, or becomes further to reach. 

So here, let’s do this… let’s have R1 and R3 aboard, and a WP. Batter clears out, R3 comes into score, there’s no hinderance whatsoever. R1 has achieved 2B, and is running on to 3B. Batter is obviously out of the box by now. SR(3) is headed back to his 3B dugout. F2 secures the ball, and has to pump twice, trying to get a line of sight, but does throw to 3B. R1 is judged safe. Are we calling anybody for INT (barring willful & intentional)??? 

Now, let’s go back to our OP, with R3 & R2. I’m not doubting that INT occurred, where the throw/play upon R2 attempting to score was hindered in enough of a manner to constitute INT. That’s sellable. What doesn’t quite add up is why it is BI, specifically. What if the SR(3) and the Batter are standing together, and INT is inferred. Are you actually selecting to impose Batter INT because it is potentially “more punitive”?? 

EDIT: I just thought of how the argument for BI falls apart here… if a play upon R2 attempting to score is inferred as INT, committed by the Batter technically, literally, and specifically, then he would be Out, and the Runner would be returned. We can’t get 2 Outs from this, so is the Runner Out or Batter Out? The Runner should be Out… that’d be the most punitive… but what do you do with the Batter? Oh! He continues to be the batter!!

Edited June 12 by MadMax

[beerguy55]

20 hours ago, MadMax said:

EDIT: I just thought of how the argument for BI falls apart here… if a play upon R2 attempting to score is inferred as INT, committed by the Batter technically, literally, and specifically, then he would be Out, and the Runner would be returned. We can’t get 2 Outs from this, so is the Runner Out or Batter Out? The Runner should be Out… that’d be the most punitive… but what do you do with the Batter? Oh! He continues to be the batter!!

Whether it's the most punitive is often irrelevant - the rules often don't care about that.  There's even a debate to whether or not calling a player out or ejecting him is more punitive.  Personally, I'd call the runner out on BI every single time, but those aren't the rules.

On BI the batter is out and the runner is returned...the exception is a play at home with less than two outs.

 

 

20 hours ago, MadMax said:

What if the SR(3) and the Batter are standing together, and INT is inferred. Are you actually selecting to impose Batter INT because it is potentially “more punitive”?? 

I'm making a decision based on who I think interfered.  If they both interfere then, yes, it would get interesting, but I'm making my judgment on the act, not the punishment.  Much like two fielders and a runner converging on a batted ball, only one of those fielders is protected at any time - use your judgment and pick one.

 

Again, I'm picking up what you're putting down, but your arguments (as well as mine) do not fit perfectly into the rules as they are presented.   

So we do the best we can to do what makes the most sense...until a higher authority rules otherwise.

I go back to my original statement - by rule and definition a batter remains a batter until they are put out or become a runner.  Whether he clears the box or not, or how he manages to get out of, or in, the way doesn't really matter.   Whether it's for the first play at home...or a subsequent play at third, or even, like the OP, at home again.   He's still a batter by rule - he hasn't yet been put out, and he's not yet a runner.  Without an exception to that standard, the OP is batter interference with two outs.  The only question is whether there is (or should be) some kind of TOI exception to allow R3's run to count.