catcher interference on check swing

[dumbdumb]

can it happen. what if the call is no he did not go vs yes he went swing. doesnt rule say there must be a swing. check swing no go is not a swing. should it be interference or just call pitch what it is

[johnnyg08]

I would say that the contact impeded the batter's ability to swing at the pitch. There really wouldn't be anything to appeal. 

[dumbdumb]

2 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

I would say that the contact impeded the batter's ability to swing at the pitch. There really wouldn't be anything to appeal. 

if he is checking his swing he is not trying to swing at the pitch or hit the ball. how bout if call is yes he went you enforce, if no he didnt go you just call the pitch whatever it was

[The Short Umpire]

3 minutes ago, dumbdumb said:

if he is checking his swing he is not trying to swing at the pitch or hit the ball. how bout if call is yes he went you enforce, if no he didnt go you just call the pitch whatever it was

If the bat hits the catchers mitt and you don’t call interference you’re really grabbing the crappy end of that stick… 

[johnnyg08]

Well, here's an example. I don't believe that we need to determine if there was a swing or not because the F2 interfered with the batter's ability to hit the baseball.
 

 

[dumbdumb]

18 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

Well, here's an example. I don't believe that we need to determine if there was a swing or not because the F2 interfered with the batter's ability to hit the baseball.
 

 

ok, but lets say just runner on 2nd and this happens but ball gets by catcher and runner goes to third and manager wants to take the result of the play. is it a ball or a strike and batter stays if it is not strike 3 or ball 4 or do you check the swing or not with 1bu or call ball or strike on the pitch that got by. and then goes from there with batter count whatever it is.

p.s. i paid my money, i can ask my question

[johnnyg08]

2 minutes ago, dumbdumb said:

p.s. i paid my money, i can ask my question

I'll hang up and listen. 😂

[dumbdumb]

5 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

I'll hang up and listen. 😂

i know you got that knotty problems book. go look it up please. the old guy i talked to said there was that one guy who always asked those type questions. when they boo'd him, that was his response. i paid my money, i'll ask my questions.

[Velho]

29 minutes ago, dumbdumb said:

i know you got that knotty problems book. go look it up please.

Ask and ye shall receive. 1975 edition.

[johnnyg08]

12 minutes ago, Velho said:

Ask and ye shall receive. 1975 edition.

Whoa.

 

[The Short Umpire]

3 hours ago, dumbdumb said:

ok, but lets say just runner on 2nd and this happens but ball gets by catcher and runner goes to third and manager wants to take the result of the play. is it a ball or a strike and batter stays if it is not strike 3 or ball 4 or do you check the swing or not with 1bu or call ball or strike on the pitch that got by. and then goes from there with batter count whatever it is.

p.s. i paid my money, i can ask my question

That’s fair. For starters, no there doesn’t need to be a swing for there to be catchers interference. In fact the rule actually states that “the batter becomes a runner and is entitled first base without liability to be put out when the catcher OR ANY FIELDER interferes with HIM.” Says nothing about interfering with a swing. Secondly, the hiccups you foresee happening in this made up scenario arise from forgetting that the ball stays live when catchers interference is called. If you happen to have a player at bat who holds back a check-swing the first call that needs to be made is whether or not the pitch was a ball or strike or if the batter swung or not. The manager can not take the result of the play if he doesn’t fully understand the result of the play. 

[DevildogUmp]

When it rains, it pours: 

Now we have catcher's interference with both no swing and a batter bailing out of the box!

[johnnyg08]

You don't even have to attempt to swing!