Dead ball on batter interference Cal Ripken rule 6.06(c)

[Doug Kindervater]

If the batter interferes with the catcher, the plate umpire shall call “interference.” The batter is out and the ball is dead. No player may advance on such interference (offensive interference) and all runners must return to the last base that was, in the judgment of the umpire, legally touched at the time of the interference. If, however, the catcher makes a play and the runner attempting to advance is put out, it is to be assumed
there was no actual interference and that runner is out — not the batter. Any other runners on the base at the time may advance as the ruling is that there is not actual interference if a runner is retired. In that case play proceeds just as if no violation had been called.              IF THE BALL IS DEAD, HOW DOES THE CATCHER MAKE A PLAY?

[Jimurray]

1 hour ago, Doug Kindervater said:

If the batter interferes with the catcher, the plate umpire shall call “interference.” The batter is out and the ball is dead. No player may advance on such interference (offensive interference) and all runners must return to the last base that was, in the judgment of the umpire, legally touched at the time of the interference. If, however, the catcher makes a play and the runner attempting to advance is put out, it is to be assumed
there was no actual interference and that runner is out — not the batter. Any other runners on the base at the time may advance as the ruling is that there is not actual interference if a runner is retired. In that case play proceeds just as if no violation had been called.              IF THE BALL IS DEAD, HOW DOES THE CATCHER MAKE A PLAY?

We don’t call BI until the runner is safe at the base. If he is out there was no BI. So the ball is not dead until we call BI. We do point at what might be hindrance right away but don’t call and kill it right away. 

[Velho]

1 hour ago, Doug Kindervater said:

If, however,

Those two words are carrying a lot of weight in that rule.

Agreed it would be more logically linear for the exception to be at the start of the rule instead of any the end.

[noumpere]

7 hours ago, Jimurray said:

We don’t call BI until the runner is safe at the base. 

We don't call BI until the initial throw fails to retire the runner.

[jimurrayalterego]

5 minutes ago, noumpere said:

We don't call BI until the initial throw or throw attempt fails to retire the runner.

Good semantic point. I was trying to be brief. My bold since we may be responding to a neophyte.  

[noumpere]

9 hours ago, jimurrayalterego said:

Good semantic point. I was trying to be brief. My bold since we may be responding to a neophyte.  

Also a good addition.

[grayhawk]

13 hours ago, noumpere said:

We don't call BI until the initial throw fails to retire the runner.

Well, we point and call "That's interference!" when we determine the batter interfered. We don't enforce the interference until the initial throw or attempted throw fails to retire the runner.

[jimurrayalterego]

56 minutes ago, grayhawk said:

Well, we point and call "That's interference!" when we determine the batter interfered. We don't enforce the interference until the initial throw or attempted throw fails to retire the runner.

I point but don't verbalize INT until the result of the hindrance is known. Our OP would ask you how anything can happen with a dead ball when you call "interference" per his semantic reading of the rule🙂